Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

City of Fort Collins – Transfort Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update

Technical Report

August 2009

Submitted to Transfort 6570 Portner Road Fort Collins, CO 80525

Submitted by

David Evans and Associates, Inc. 1331 17th Street, Suite 900 Denver, CO 80202

In Conjunction with BBC Research & Consulting Connetics Transportation Group RAE Consultants, Inc.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... 1 ES.1 Project Overview and Purpose...... 1 ES.2 Evaluation of Existing and Programmed Transit Services and Facilities ...... 2 ES.3 Public Involvement Process ...... 3 ES.4 Proposed Phased Service Concepts...... 5 ES.5 Poudre School District...... 12 ES.6 Operating, Maintenance, and Capital Requirements ...... 15 ES.7 Implementation...... 17 Implementation Timeline...... 21 Other Implementation Considerations...... 22 Monitoring ...... 22 Future Action Items...... 23 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1. Project Partners...... 1 1.2. Project Background and Purpose...... 1 1.3. Project Goals and Objectives ...... 3 1.4. Study Process ...... 4 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS...... 9 2.1. Existing Transit Market...... 9 2.1.1. Fare Categories and Transfer Policy ...... 9 2.2. Existing Transit Services...... 11 2.3. Other Public Transportation Services and Programs within the Transfort Service Area...... 15 2.3.1. SMARTTrips...... 15 2.3.2. Greyhound ...... 15 2.3.3. SuperShuttle (formerly Shamrock Airport Express)...... 15 2.3.4. Seniors Alternatives IN Transportation (SAINT) ...... 15 2.3.5. Transit Services in Neighboring Cities...... 16 2.4. Existing and Programmed Equipment and Facilities...... 16 2.4.1. Vehicle Fleet ...... 16 2.4.2. Transit Centers...... 17 2.5. Existing Marketing Program ...... 17 2.6. Assessment of Existing Transit System Performance...... 18 2.6.1. Route and System Productivity...... 19 2.6.2. Stop-Level Productivity ...... 27 2.7. Summary...... 29 2.8. Poudre School District (PSD) ...... 30 2.8.1. Existing PSD High School Characteristics and School Bus Transportation...... 31

August 2009 i

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

2.8.2. Existing Transfort Service to PSD High Schools ...... 32 2.8.3. Assessment of Existing Transfort Service to PSD High Schools ...... 32 3. DEMOGRAPHICS AND COMMUNITY PROFILE...... 35 3.1. Community Profile...... 35 3.2. Land Use Density...... 35 3.3. Demographic Information...... 42 3.4. Traffic Conditions ...... 46 3.5. Related Plans and Studies...... 50 4. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION ...... 51 4.1. Public Involvement Process ...... 51 4.2. Council Briefings and Presentations ...... 51 4.3. Summary of Comments and Issues ...... 52 4.3.1. General Feedback...... 52 4.3.2. Comments on Service Coverage...... 52 4.3.3. Comments on Service Design ...... 54 4.3.4. Comments on Frequency and Hours of Operation...... 54 4.3.5. Comments on How to Encourage Ridership...... 55 4.4. Financial Advisory Committee...... 55 4.4.1. FAC Purpose...... 55 4.4.2. FAC Representation...... 55 4.4.3. FAC Process ...... 56 5. PROPOSED PHASED SERVICE CONCEPTS ...... 57 5.1. Phase 1 ...... 60 5.1.1. Phase 1 Overview...... 60 5.1.2. Near-Term Improvements...... 60 5.1.3. Phase 1 Service Plan...... 63 5.1.4. Poudre School District – Phase 1 Components...... 69 5.2. Phase 2 ...... 72 5.2.1. Phase 2 Overview...... 72 5.2.2. Phase 2 Service Plan...... 72 5.2.3. Poudre School District – Phase 2 Components...... 79 5.3. Phase 3 ...... 83 5.3.1. Phase 3 Overview...... 83 5.3.2. Phase 3 Service Plan...... 83 5.3.3. Poudre School District – Phase 3 Components...... 91 5.4. Changes to Poudre School District Transportation Eligibility ...... 94 5.5. Future Ridership Analysis ...... 97 5.6. Proposed Transfort Marketing Efforts ...... 97 6. CAPITAL AND OPERATING REQUIREMENTS...... 101 6.1. Existing Operating and Maintenance Requirements ...... 101

August 2009 ii

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

6.2. Phase 1 Operating and Maintenance Requirements ...... 102 6.3. Phase 2 Operating and Maintenance Requirements ...... 103 6.4. Phase 3 Operating and Maintenance Requirements ...... 105 6.5. Capital Requirements...... 106 6.5.1. Vehicle Requirements...... 106 6.5.2. Facility Requirements...... 109 7. IMPLEMENTATION OF SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS ...... 111 7.1. Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) ...... 111 7.1.1. Funding and Evaluation Process ...... 111 7.1.2. Existing Financial Conditions ...... 113 7.1.3. Operation and Maintenance Revenue and Planned Expenses...... 114 7.1.4. Capital Revenue and Planned Expenses ...... 115 7.1.5. Recommended New Operation and Maintenance Funding Mechanisms ...... 116 7.1.6. Transit Utility Fee ...... 117 7.1.7. New Negotiated Agreements ...... 117 7.1.8. Special Assessment...... 117 7.1.9. Revenue Modeling ...... 118 7.2. Regional Governance for Transit Services...... 120 7.3. Implementation Timeline ...... 121 7.4. Other Implementation Considerations...... 122 7.4.1. Fare Change Policy...... 123 7.4.2. Route Change Policy ...... 123 7.5. Monitoring After Implementation ...... 124 7.5.1. Standardized Performance Monitoring ...... 124 7.5.2. Samples of Industry Practices ...... 126 7.6. Future Action Items ...... 130

List of Figures Figure 1. Transit Service Concept Development Process...... 5 Figure 2. Project Schedule...... 7 Figure 3. Percentage of Ridership by Fare Category...... 11 Figure 4. Existing Transfort System (as of September 2008) ...... 12 Figure 5. Transfort Service Philosophy ...... 13 Figure 6. Transfort Annual Ridership (Total Passenger Trips), 1998-2008...... 19 Figure 7. Average Daily Ridership by Route – CSU In-Session...... 26 Figure 8. Average Daily Ridership by Route – CSU Not In-Session ...... 26 Figure 9. Weekday Ridership Activity by Stop ...... 28 Figure 10. Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Existing Transfort Routes (Current Walk Boundaries) ...... 34

August 2009 iii

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Figure 11. Fort Collins 2005 Population Density by TAZ ...... 36 Figure 12. Fort Collins 2035 Population Density by TAZ ...... 37 Figure 13. Fort Collins 2005 Employment Density by TAZ ...... 38 Figure 14. Fort Collins 2035 Employment Density by TAZ ...... 39 Figure 15. Fort Collins 2005 Combined Land Use Density by TAZ...... 40 Figure 16. Fort Collins 2035 Combined Land Use Density by TAZ...... 41 Figure 17. Fort Collins Student Density (2000) ...... 44 Figure 18. Fort Collins 1999 Youth Population Density (17 Years and Younger) ..... 44 Figure 19. Fort Collins 1999 Senior Population Density (60 Years and Older) ...... 45 Figure 20. Fort Collins Median Household Income ...... 45 Figure 21. Congestion and Traffic Volumes in Fort Collins (2005)...... 48 Figure 22. Projected Congestion and Traffic Volumes in Fort Collins (2035)...... 49 Figure 23. Existing Transfort System (as of March 2009) ...... 62 Figure 24. Phase 1 Improvements – Fort Collins...... 66 Figure 25. PSD/Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Phase 1 Routes ...... 71 Figure 26. Phase 2 Improvements – Fort Collins...... 76 Figure 27. PSD/Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Phase 2 Routes ...... 82 Figure 28. Phase 3 Improvements – Fort Collins...... 87 Figure 29. PSD/Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Phase 3 Routes ...... 93 Figure 30. PSD/Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Existing Transfort Routes (Expanded Walk Boundaries) ...... 96 Figure 31. Funding Challenge: Finding Balance ...... 112 Figure 32. Current Revenue Sources – Transfort ...... 113 Figure 33. Projected Transfort Operation and Maintenance Revenues from FAC- Recommended Funding Mechanisms ...... 119 Figure 34. RTD Effectiveness – Productivity Chart...... 129 Figure 35. RTD Service Performance 2007 ...... 130

List of Tables Table 1. Fare Structure – Transfort (including FoxTrot)...... 9 Table 2. Existing Routes – Service Characteristics ...... 14 Table 3. Transfort Vehicle Fleet...... 16 Table 4. Key Productivity Measures for Existing System – Weekday...... 22 Table 5. Key Productivity Measures for Existing System – Saturday...... 24 Table 6. Weekday Ridership at Top 10 Transit Stops...... 27 Table 7. School Bus Eligibility of PSD High School Students ...... 31 Table 8. Transfort Routes that Serve PSD High Schools ...... 32

August 2009 iv

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Table 9. Summary of How Phases 1, 2, and 3 Satisfy Project Goals ...... 58 Table 10. Proposed Service Characteristics for Phase 1 Routes in Fort Collins ..... 67 Table 11. Phase 1 Routes that Serve PSD High Schools...... 69 Table 12. PSD Students within ½-Mile of Phase 1 Routes ...... 70 Table 13. Proposed Service Characteristics for Phase 2 Routes in Fort Collins ..... 77 Table 14. Phase 2 Routes that Serve PSD High Schools...... 79 Table 15. PSD Students within ½-Mile of Phase 2 Routes ...... 81 Table 16. Proposed Service Characteristics for Phase 3 Routes in Fort Collins ..... 88 Table 17. Phase 3 Routes that Serve PSD High Schools...... 91 Table 18. PSD Students within ½-Mile of Phase 3 Routes ...... 92 Table 19. Change in Number of Current Students Outside of Walk Boundary ...... 95 Table 20. Summary of Estimated Changes Related to Expansion of Walk Boundaries...... 95 Table 21. Summary of Ridership Forecasts...... 97 Table 22. Existing Transfort 2008 Daily and Annual Revenue Hours ...... 101 Table 23. Existing Transfort 2008 Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs...... 102 Table 24. Phase 1 Transfort Daily and Annual Revenue Hours ...... 102 Table 25. Phase 1 Transfort Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs...... 103 Table 26. Phase 2 Transfort Daily and Annual Revenue Hours ...... 104 Table 27. Phase 2 Transfort Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs...... 104 Table 28. Phase 3 Transfort Daily and Annual Revenue Hours ...... 105 Table 29. Phase 3 Transfort Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs...... 106 Table 30. Bus Fleet Requirements for the TSOP Update ...... 107 Table 31. TSOP Update Fleet Acquisition Plan ...... 109 Table 32. Projected Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs and Funding Needs for Phase 1 ...... 114 Table 33. Projected Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs and Funding Needs for Phase 2 ...... 114 Table 34. Projected Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs and Funding Needs for Phase 3 ...... 115 Table 35. Capital Funding Needs for Phase 1 Vehicles...... 115 Table 36. Capital Funding Needs for Phase 2 Vehicles...... 115 Table 37. Capital Funding Needs for Phase 3 Vehicles...... 116 Table 38. Transfort Operation and Maintenance Revenue Projections – Phase 3 Buildout...... 119 Table 39. Pierce Transit Performance Standards for Local Routes...... 127 Table 40. Pierce Transit Performance Standards for Express Routes...... 128

August 2009 v

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report Appendices Appendix A Related Plans and Studies Appendix B Existing Transfort System Route Profiles Appendix C Stakeholder Meeting List Appendix D Public Comments Appendix E Service Statistics for Phased Improvements Appendix F Citizen’s Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) Correspondence Appendix G Financial Plan Background Information

August 2009 vi

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report Acknowledgements Scott Weeks, Senior Transportation Planner, City of Fort Collins, Transportation Planning & Special Projects Division Fort Collins City Council Members Tess Heffernan, Financial Advisory Committee, Doug Hutchinson, Mayor Facilitator, City of Fort Collins Kelly Ohlson, Mayor Pro-Tem Don Williams, City of Loveland City Manger Ben Manvel Keith Reester, City of Loveland Director of Lisa Poppaw Public Works Aislinn Kottwitz Marcy Abreo, Transit Manager, City of Loveland Wade Troxell - COLT David Roy Dave Klockeman, City of Loveland Engineer Scott French, Director of Transportation, Poudre Fort Collins Transportation Board School District Gary Thomas, Chairperson Scott VanTatenhove Consultant Team Sara Frazier Ed Schumm, Project Manager, David Evans and Bill Jenkins Associates, Inc. Garry Steen Kara Showalter, Planning Lead, David Evans John Lund and Associates, Inc. Sid Simonson Leah Langerman, Public Involvement Shane Miller Coordinator, David Evans and Associates, Inc. Kip Mcauley Jim Baker, Transit Service Concepts/Operations Edmond Robert Planning, Connetics Transportation Group Olga Duvall Herb Higginbotham, Lead Transit Operations Planner, Connetics Transportation Group Agency Staff Adam Orens, Financial Analyst, BBC Research & Consulting Darin Atteberry, City of Fort Collins City Manager Rick Evans, Poudre School District Coordination, RAE Consultants, Inc. Diane Jones, City of Fort Collins Deputy City Manager Jeff Scheick, Director of Planning, City of Fort Financial Advisory Committee Collins Development & Transportation Gary Thomas Marlys Sittner, General Manager, Transfort Dial- Mary Atchison A-Ride, City of Fort Collins Bob Heath Kurt Ravenschlag, Project Manager, Assistant Dan Gould General Manager, Transfort Dial-A-Ride, City of Donna Chapel Fort Collins Doug Johnson Nicole Hahn, Transfort Dial-A-Ride, City of Fort Dan Hill Collins Kitty Wild Denise Weston, Assistant Project Manager, Senior Transportation Planner, City of Fort Members of the Public Collins, Transportation Planning & Special Many business owners, property owners, Projects Division residents, and members of the public participated in this planning effort. Thank you to all who contributed to this Plan.

August 2009 vii

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

This page intentionally left blank.

August 2009 viii

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.1 Project Overview and Purpose The Transit Strategic Plan (TSP) process is a collaborative partnership among the City of Fort Collins-Transfort, the City of Loveland-COLT, and the Poudre School District (PSD). The purpose of the TSP was to provide a coordinated effort in updating the 2002 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP) and the 2004 COLT Transit Plan, as well as providing detailed analysis of the opportunities public transportation offers PSD high schools. The plan also addresses the coordination of transit service with the planned Mason Corridor MAX project, identifies funding mechanisms and practical phasing options, and addresses financial solutions required to create and sustain a high-performing transit system. The 2009 TSP is an update to the 2002 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan adopted by the Fort Collins City Council and the 2004 COLT Transit Plan adopted by Loveland City Council. Separate documents have been created for Transfort and COLT in order to simplify the plan adoption process. Undertaking the 2009 TSOP update was approved by Fort Collins City Council as part of the 2008/2009 Budgeting for Outcomes process to be completed by the end of 2009.

Six primary goals were developed to guide the development of the 2009 TSOP update and to meet the purpose of the project. These goals are outlined below:

• Goal #1 – Develop an expanded transit system focused on productivity and performance to meet the Transportation Master Plan and City Plan Policies. • Goal #2 – Meet and exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal for Transportation CO2 reductions by 2020 • Goal #3 – Provide enhanced mobility for seniors, youth, disabled, and transit dependent • Goal #4 – Develop a public transportation system that reduces roadway related costs for maintenance, right-of-way acquisition, and construction • Goal #5 - Provide funding recommendations to fully implement the Transit Strategic Plan • Goal #6 - Stimulate the local economy through investment in public transportation infrastructure and operations.

The 2009 TSOP update was undertaken in several key steps, noted below.

• Collection of community input • Review of related plans and studies • Evaluation of existing transit market • Consideration of growth patterns • Assessment of existing transit services and conditions • Development of initial transit service concepts • Identification of opportunities to phase transit improvements

August 2009 ES-1

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

• Screening of initial concepts and identification of recommended strategy • Integration of PSD transportation needs • Evaluation of funding and governance options • Update and adoption of the TSOP update

ES.2 Evaluation of Existing and Programmed Transit Services and Facilities Transfort provides local and paratransit service in the City of Fort Collins with a connecting regional route (the FoxTrot) to Loveland. Transfort operates 18 routes when CSU and PSD are in-session and 14 routes when schools are not in-session. Fixed route service is provided Monday through Saturday and generally begins between 6:00 and 6:30 AM, with the last trip scheduled to depart between 6:30 and 7:00PM. Service frequencies range from 20 to 60 minutes. Paratransit Dial-A-Ride service currently operates between the hours of 6:00 AM and 11:00 PM Monday through Saturday within a specific service area. Transfort operates under a defined philosophy that has been approved by the Fort Collins City Council. The Transfort service philosophy focuses on productivity, meaning that bus routes focus on areas with higher ridership potential, as opposed to dispersed coverage. Figure ES-1 summarizes the two philosophies.

Figure ES-1. Transfort Service Philosophy

Source: Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, 2002

Transfort serves a variety of transit users including adults, seniors and disabled individuals, youth, PSD students, CSU students, and Dial-A-Ride users. Ridership composition for the existing transit service by fare category is shown in Figure ES-2.

August 2009 ES-2

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

As shown, PSD and CSU-related riders represent the largest portion of ridership (nearly 60%).

Figure ES-2. Percentage of Ridership by Fare Category

Source: Transfort

Transfort owns and maintains 26 standard 40-ft transit buses, four mid-sized 35-ft transit buses, and 13 paratransit vehicles as part of its fleet. Services currently operate out of three transit centers: the Downtown Transit Center (DTC), the South Transit Center (STC), and the CSU Transit Center. The STC will be relocated as part of the Mason Corridor project to a location off of Fairway Lane. Funding has been secured for the new STC from a Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) funding program.

An assessment of existing transit system performance was conducted in order to identify the productivity and effectiveness of the existing Transfort system. System- wide, Transfort reported approximately 1.9 million riders between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2008 on its fixed-route system. Transfort ridership varies significantly depending on whether or not CSU is in-session. On average, weekday ridership is 73% higher when CSU is in-session than when it is out of session. Key productivity measures were evaluated for each route in order to identify those routes which are more efficient, those that are underperforming, and routes which are not able to accommodate high demand. This analysis contributed to the development of service concept improvements.

ES.3 Public Involvement Process Public input was gathered from the community at a series of public and stakeholder meetings in an effort to gain current perspectives and needs regarding transit services in Fort Collins and Loveland. Key public stakeholder activities conducted in Fort Collins

August 2009 ES-3

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report in support of the TSOP update are listed below. Comments were also received via email, phone and postal mail.

• Three public meetings held from July 2008 to April 2009 • Open houses held at the four PSD high schools (Fort Collins, Poudre, Rocky Mountain, and Fossil Ridge high schools) • Stakeholder briefings/interviews with city staff, local and regional governmental agencies, advocacy groups, CSU, boards and commissions, UniverCity Connections, Chamber of Commerce, local businesses, the real estate and development community, transit users, and social service agencies

The most frequently received comments from the community are listed below:

• Increase frequency to every half hour, at least • Increase hours, especially in the evening and on weekends • Establish regional connections between Fort Collins and Longmont • Schedules and routes should be easy to understand • Need to implement a grid system • Need for two-way route patterns in some areas • Need to access lower income housing areas • More room for bikes on buses and bike parking at stops • More transit coverage throughout the community

A Citizen’s Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) was organized in support of the project. The FAC’s purpose, representation, and evaluation criteria for revenue sources are detailed in Figure ES-3.

August 2009 ES-4

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-3. Citizen’s Financial Advisory Committee

Source: Transfort and DEA

ES.4 Proposed Phased Service Concepts Several near-term transit service improvements were implemented in March 2009 as a result of initial recommendations from the TSOP update. These changes were incorporated into the TSOP update under Phase 1 improvements. Near-term improvements included changes in the schedules of seven routes to enhance efficiency, the elimination of one route and the addition of one new route (Route 19 with service between CSU and Front Range Community College via Shields).

The TSOP update presents a framework for implementation of future transit improvements in three phases. Phase 1 recommends modest transit growth over existing service. It assumes the implementation of MAX service and the refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX. Figure ES-4 provides a map of service improvements recommended for Fort Collins as part of Phase 1. An overview of these recommendations follows.

August 2009 ES-5

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Local Services • Includes relocation of the South Transit Center (STC) to the MAX terminus at a location off of Fairway Lane • Assumes the implementation of MAX service along the Mason Corridor from the DTC to the proposed new STC • Proposes some new services and realignment of existing routes along Elizabeth, University, Horsetooth and Drake • Recommends the extension of hours on select routes so that early evening service (until 8:30 PM) is provided on weekdays and Saturdays. • Recommends improved service frequencies on CSU routes and proposes a new numbering system for CSU routes • Includes a proposed new Downtown circulator that would be operated by Transfort, but would most likely be funded through public-private partnerships

Poudre School District Services • Includes afternoon service via two dedicated local routes that serve Lincoln Junior High and Poudre High schools • Recommends improved access to Rocky Mountain High School via Shields

Regional Services • Proposes modification of FoxTrot route so that it connects to the proposed new STC in Fort Collins (terminating at the existing North Transfer Center in Loveland)

August 2009 ES-6

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-4. Phase 1 Improvements – Fort Collins

Source: DEA

August 2009 ES-7

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Phase 2 recommends significant expansion of transit service in Fort Collins, as well as expansion of regional connections to Denver. Partnering strategies between participating jurisdictions would likely be considered for implementation of regional services. This phase assumes the continued refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX. Phase 2 introduces a transition to a grid network in Fort Collins and provides greater route coverage, higher service frequencies, and longer span of service. Figure ES-5 provides a map of service improvements recommended for Fort Collins as part of Phase 2. An overview of these recommendations follows.

Local Services • Proposes a new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center in the vicinity of Harmony Road and Timberline Road • Introduces the transition to a grid route configuration • Recommends 15 new or reconfigured grid system routes with improved peak hour service frequencies • Recommends 10 routes with early evening service (until 8:30 PM), two routes with late evening service (until midnight), and 16 routes with Saturday service

Poudre School District Services • Provides greater public transit coverage near PSD high school student residences • Proposes increases in service frequency in the vicinity of Fort Collins, Rocky Mountain and Fossil Ridge high schools

Regional Services • Recommends a new regional route connecting Fort Collins, Loveland, and Denver • Proposes Saturday service for the regional route connecting Fort Collins and Loveland, as well as late evening service (until midnight) on weekdays and Saturdays

August 2009 ES-8

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-5. Phase 2 Improvements – Fort Collins

Source: DEA

August 2009 ES-9

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Phase 3 recommends additional transit growth in Fort Collins including longer service hours and limited Sunday transit service, as well as expansion of regional service to Denver, Boulder, Berthoud, and Longmont. Partnering strategies would likely be considered for implementation of regional services. This phase assumes the implementation of additional MAX services that extend outside of the Mason Corridor and completes the transition to a full grid network in Fort Collins. Figure ES-6 provides a map of service improvements recommended for Fort Collins as part of Phase 3. An overview of these recommendations follows.

Local Services • Proposes two new express routes to operate alongside the original MAX bus rapid transit (BRT) services, and extend outside of the Mason to minimize transfers for high demand travel patterns and increase service frequencies along Mason Corridor • Proposes late evening service (until midnight) for all express and MAX routes on weekdays and weekends • Proposes extended span of service with 12 routes offering early evening service and four routes offering late evening service • Recommends additional Saturday service on select routes • Recommends Sunday service for seven routes • Includes the complete transition to a grid route configuration • Recommends increased service frequencies on most routes • Proposes new service to Mountain Vista area

Poudre School District Services • Proposes improved connections and service frequencies to Fort Collins and Fossil Ridge high schools • Recommends additional public transit coverage for PSD high school students including longer service hours and greater opportunity for connections to FRCC and CSU

Regional Services • Proposes a new route providing connections between South Fort Collins, Loveland (Centerra), Longmont, and Boulder with additional Saturday and Sunday service • Recommends reconfiguration of a regional route to provide service between Fort Collins, Loveland, Berthoud, and Longmont and introduces Sunday service • Recommends additional early evening service and late evening service for regional routes

August 2009 ES-10

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-6. Phase 3 Improvements – Fort Collins

Source: DEA

August 2009 ES-11

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report ES.5 Poudre School District PSD serves approximately 24,000 students in 50 schools. School bus transportation and Transfort service combine to meet the needs of students attending the four PSD high schools: Poudre, Rocky Mountain, Fort Collins, and Fossil Ridge. PSD has partnered in this study in order to identify opportunities to enhance and promote Transfort services to these four high schools.

PSD school bus transportation currently provides 1.2 million miles and 203,000 hours of service at a cost of approximately $7.2 million per year. Approximately 50% of current PSD students are eligible for school bus service. Students who are eligible for school bus service must live within the defined attendance boundary for that school and must live outside of the defined walk boundary, which is currently defined as 2.0-miles from the school.

Transfort routes are not specifically dedicated or oriented to the high schools, except for Routes 91 and 92, which provide one trip each in the afternoon from Lincoln Jr. High and Poudre high schools respectively. Poudre High School is served by four Transfort routes. Rocky Mountain and Fossil Ridge high schools are served by two routes and Fort Collins High School is served by one route. PSD high school students generate several types of transit trips including home-to-school and school-to-home trips, as well as after school trips related to sports and other special events and travel to CSU and Front Range Community College (FRCC) for advanced and/or specialized classes.

Implementation of the phased TSOP update will provide PSD students with improved coverage and frequencies, which will provide for greater convenience and flexibility for students making home-to-school, school-to-home, as well as special trips including travel to CSU and FRCC. Table ES-1 provides an overview of the increase in service coverage that would exist under all three phases.

Phase 1 provides for incrementally better access to PSD high schools, particularly to Rocky Mountain High School which would be served by one additional route. Phase 2 provides better access to PSD high schools, particularly to Fort Collins, Rocky Mountain, and Fossil Ridge high schools which would benefit from increased service frequencies on nearby routes. Phase 3 recommends further geographic expansion of coverage and would benefit all four PSD high schools with increased service frequencies.

August 2009 ES-12

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Table ES-1. PSD Students within ½-Mile of Phase 1, 2, and 3 Routes

Percent of Students within ½-Mile of Route High School (Percent Change compared to Existing Routes) Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Poudre 44% (+3%) 47% (+11%) 47% (+11%) Rocky Mountain 68% (+<1%) 83% (+22%) 83% (+22%) Fort Collins 76% (+15%) 84% (+27%) 84% (+27%) Fossil Ridge 40% (+26%) 67% (+110%) 67% (+110%) Total 57% (+8%) 69% (+31%) 69% (+32%)

Source: DEA

Over 5,500 students currently attend the four PSD high schools. In fall 2009, an estimated 1,800 additional students will be attending the four high schools when 9th graders will be shifted from junior high schools and integrated into the high schools. In order to meet increased transportation demands, PSD is considering an expansion of the walk boundary from the current 2.0-miles to 2.5-miles from the school in fall 2009, which would reduce the number of students eligible for PSD transportation. Under the phased improvements, these students would have significantly improved access to the Transfort public transit system. The expansion of the walk boundaries would result in an estimated 21% reduction in the number of students eligible for bussing. This could result in over $100,000 of annual cost savings for PSD. Figure ES-7 illustrates transit coverage within ½-mile of existing Transfort routes with both current and expanded walk boundaries.

August 2009 ES-13

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-7. Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Existing Transfort Routes

Source: DEA

August 2009 ES-14

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report ES.6 Operating, Maintenance, and Capital Requirements Transfort operates a total of 18 fixed routes including the FoxTrot regional route connecting to Loveland and a Dial-A-Ride service. Twenty-three vehicles are deployed for the fixed-route service during peak weekday operations. Total operating and maintenance (O&M) costs were approximately $8.2 million in 2008, with 75% of costs associated with fixed-route services, 4% with regional service and 21% with Dial-A-Ride service.

Phase 1 services include a total of 19 fixed routes (including the Mason Corridor MAX and one regional route), with 26 local vehicles and one regional vehicle deployed during peak weekday operations. Phase 1 would require over 30% more revenue hours for fixed-route services compared to the existing system operations. These additional revenue hours equate to an approximate increase of $3.3 million in annual O&M costs from existing levels (assuming an inflation rate of 5% for a three year horizon).

Phase 2 services include a total of 20 fixed routes (including the Mason Corridor MAX and two regional routes), with 38 local vehicles and four regional vehicles deployed during peak weekday operations. Phase 2 would require approximately 110% more revenue hours for fixed-route services as compared to existing system operations. These additional revenue hours equate to an approximate increase of $10.6 million in annual O&M costs from existing levels (assuming an inflation rate of 5% for a five year horizon).

Phase 3 services include a total of 22 routes (including three express routes that would operate along portions of the Mason Corridor and three regional routes), with 41 local vehicles and 10 regional vehicles deployed during peak weekday operations. Phase 3 would require nearly 170% more revenue hours as compared to existing system operations. These additional revenue hours equate to an approximate increase of $17.7 million in annual O&M costs from existing levels (assuming an inflation rate of 5% for a seven year horizon).

Regional services under each phase represent proposed routes that connect Fort Collins with other front range communities. Therefore, implementation and funding requirements would likely be undertaken as part of a partnership arrangement.

Several capital improvements would be required to support the phased operational recommendations for the TSOP update. This includes both vehicle requirements and facility improvements. Transfort existing fixed route service requires an overall fleet of 30 active vehicles. The mix of vehicle types includes 26 standard 40 ft. transit buses and 4 mid-sized 35 ft. transit buses. A 60 ft. low floor alternative fuel bus will be used for the Mason Corridor MAX BRT service. Compressed Natural Gas and Bio-Diesel is used for operation of the 30 buses in the existing Transfort Fleet. The proposed phased improvements would require additional vehicles to provide increased service levels.

Eleven vehicles in the Transfort fleet are currently scheduled for replacement. This will require an investment of approximately $4.4 million independent of any proposed

August 2009 ES-15

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report service expansions. The Phase 1 three year time horizon would also require an investment in additional replacement vehicles and new buses for the Mason Corridor MAX service. Mason Corridor buses will be funded through a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Small Starts Grant. Due to the two routes being replaced by MAX, three fewer vehicles are needed for the remainder of the improved local fixed-route system. The cost associated with replacement vehicles for Phase 1 would equate to approximately $6.5 million in future year dollars.

Phase 2 would require a total of 50 vehicles (17 additional vehicles over Phase 1). The cost associated with fleet expansion for Phase 2 would equate to approximately $8.7 million in future year dollars. Phase 3 would require a total of 60 vehicles (10 additional vehicles over Phase 2) and also some additional replacement vehicles due to outdated service life. The cost associated with both fleet expansion for Phase 3 and replacement of outdated vehicles would equate to approximately $8.4 million in future year dollars. Transfort may be able to secure finding contributions for up to 80% of vehicle costs through FTA programs such as the Section 5309 Capital Funding Grant. If Transfort is successful in securing federal capital funding, the total local cost of vehicle acquisition for all phases could be substantially reduced.

Several additional facility requirements would be necessary with the recommended phased improvements. Fleet expansion associated with Phases 2 and 3 would exceed the capacity of Transfort’s current bus storage facility, which has some additional storage capacity planned for the Mason Corridor MAX vehicles. This could be addressed through reconfiguration and expansion of the current facility onto adjacent land, purchase or construction of a new supplemental facility, leased facility arrangements, or utilization of facilities that are provided through a contractor.

The TSOP update assumes that Transfort’s current contract with Next Media would support the need for additional transit stops. Therefore, no additional capital expenses for standard bus stops are reflected in this plan. Finally, each phase involves some form of transit infrastructure improvement to support the proposed service enhancements. Phase 1 would require various capital components related to MAX BRT service, including a relocated South Transit Center and new outdoor bus storage. In addition, Phase 1 would require a University Avenue transitway through a short segment of the CSU campus. Phase 2 recommends a new PVH Harmony Campus transit center and would also require expanded maintenance facilities (as noted above). Phase 3 includes the same facility requirements as Phase 2, with the addition of a bus turnaround facility at Elizabeth and Overland Trail. The magnitude and extent of these improvements would require further definition as the implementation planning is undertaken in each phase.

August 2009 ES-16

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

ES.7 Implementation The Citizen’s Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) was organized by Transfort and COLT staff and met on a semi-monthly basis from November 2008 to April 2009 to evaluate and recommend funding strategies for implementing the recommended phased improvements. Early in the process, FAC members and Transfort and COLT staff acknowledged that defining a fair and practical funding plan meant balancing may disparate factors. Figure ES-8 shows a visual representation of the factors that must be balanced to achieve an equitable funding strategy for Transfort and COLT.

Figure ES-8. Funding Challenges: Finding Balance

Source: BBC Research & Consulting

A wide variety of revenue generation mechanisms and institutional structures were evaluated by the FAC as potential ways to generate and collect funds for transit improvement. The FAC selected a mix of funding mechanisms that offer a fair appointment of costs and reliable revenue production.

Figure ES-9 exhibits the current sources of revenue for Transfort. Major revenue sources for Transfort include a large general fund transfer and revenue for the federal government. Other Transfort revenue sources include a negotiated agreement with the Associated Students of Colorado State University (ASCSU), farebox revenue, and advertising.

August 2009 ES-17

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-9. Current Revenue Sources – Transfort

Source: Transfort

Estimated revenues for Transfort were compared to the estimated O&M costs for the proposed phased improvements. This analysis resulted in the identification of funding shortfalls for O&M costs under each phase, summarized in Table ES-2. It should be noted that regional services would likely be implemented through a shared funding arrangement with other jurisdictions, and the shortfall would not be the full responsibility of Transfort. Assuming an ultimate Phase 3 build-out, Figure ES-10 exhibits the future projected amount of available revenue for O&M, the total projected amount of O&M funding required for implementation, and the resulting shortfall.

Table ES-2. Projected Annual O&M Funding Shortfall for Transfort Phased Improvements

Funding Shortfall Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Transfort Local $2,695,600 $7,257,000 $11,258,100 Transfort Regional $36,450 $632,100 $2,402,300 Total $2,731,050 $7,889,100 $13,660,400 Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

August 2009 ES-18

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-10. Annual O&M Shortfall for Phase 3 Implementation

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

Estimated capital costs for vehicle acquisition for Transfort and COLT were also compared to the minimum estimated federal funding sources that would likely be available. This analysis resulted in the identification of funding shortfalls for capital costs under each phase, summarized in Table ES-3. Assuming an ultimate Phase 3 build-out, Figure ES-11 exhibits the future projected cumulative amount of available funding for capital expenses, the total projected cumulative amount of capital funding required for implementation, and the resultant shortfall.

Table ES-3. Projected Annual Capital Funding Shortfall for Transfort Phased Improvements

Funding Shortfall Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Transfort Local $5,932,550 $6,047,300 $3,402,400 Transfort Regional N/A $1,381,550 $3,639,600 Total $5,932,550 $7,428,850 $7,042,000

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

August 2009 ES-19

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-11. Capital Funding Shortfall for Transfort Phase 3 Implementation

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

The FAC recommended a series of funding mechanisms, all designed to allocate the costs of Transfort and COLT services to those that benefit from them. The following funding mechanisms were chosen based on their ability to provide a reliable revenue stream and to grow with the community. Funding mechanisms options that could be considered for future implementation for Transfort and COLT include:

• Maintenance of Effort – The continuation of municipal general fund revenues with a growth in fares commensurate with an increased level of service. • Dedicated Sales Tax – An excise tax on retail goods imposed to the point of sale. The FAC recommended a 1/4-cent tax. • Transit Utility Fee – An additional fee charged to residential and business utility accounts. • New Negotiated Agreements – The active investigation of new partners, including PSD and FRCC, as well as the re-negotiation of current agreements. • Special Assessment – An annual per household or square foot charge placed on property within a special improvement district.

Figure ES-12 provides an overview of the projected revenues that could be available for each of the above funding mechanisms recommended by the FAC.

August 2009 ES-20

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Figure ES-12. Projected Transfort Operation and Maintenance Revenues from FAC-Recommended Funding Mechanisms

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

The FAC also recommended the investigation of the feasibility and practicality associated with the formation of a Regional Service Authority (RSA) to serve in the administration, organization and consolidation of transit operations for Fort Collins and Loveland. An RSA is a form of government designed to provide specified services on a regional basis, in this case public transportation. The FAC recommended an RSA because of its potential revenue raising authority, inter-jurisdictional flexibility between Fort Collins and Loveland, ease of formation, and public acceptance. The FAC specifically recommended the investigation of an RSA structure with no internal funding mechanisms, meaning that each member jurisdiction must raise its own funds and purchase transportation service from the RSA. Fort Collins and Loveland are the most likely candidates to purchase services from the RSA, although other jurisdictions would be able to raise funds by any means when they join the RSA. Further study of a regional transit provider is recommended as an action item of this report.

Implementation Timeline The TSOP update has been developed based on a potential implementation horizon of seven years. A phased approach for the TSOP has been proposed to serve as a framework for implementation priorities, and to allow for the opportunity to scale new improvements and investments to future available funding sources. The ability to secure new or additional funding sources over the next two years will be critical in achieving full build-out of all three proposed phases.

August 2009 ES-21

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

Successful implementation and meeting the desired timing for phased improvements will require that the funding mechanisms described in the previous sections are in place before the specific target years for implementation. This is necessary to build capital reserves that are needed for the purchase of new vehicles. Ongoing revenue streams from future revenue sources will then be used to fund annual operating and maintenance costs for expanded transit services.

Other Implementation Considerations The previous 2002 TSOP presented a number of key considerations that require attention as new transit services are considered for implementation. Many of these tasks are routinely addressed when any level of service refinements are undertaken. These common planning steps, operational issues and guidelines for many of these tasks are briefly summarized below.

• Dates for Start of New Service – Implementation target dates should consider the necessary steps for Council approval and public process. In addition, vehicle procurement should be carefully coordinated with scheduled implementation. Summer is often a common season to implement substantial route changes in university communities, which allows drivers to become more familiar with services before school sessions and winter weather begin. • Ridership and Customer Impacts – Changes in ridership trends should be monitored to determine issues with system familiarity and the level of benefit realized from new route configurations. Ridership trends after several months provide the best indication of service change results. • Further Service Revisions – Early service refinements could be necessary if new routes are not operating or performing as desired. Schedule times, safety, peak load and demand points, transfers and complaints should be monitored to determine if early route revisions are necessary. • FTA Grant Funding for Vehicles – The potential to secure grant funding for future vehicle purchases should be identified as soon as possible. The timing for the grant application process and vehicle procurement could effect the desired implementation dates for new service. • Responsibilities of Transfort Staff – New staff responsibilities related to service changes include new marketing and informational materials, hiring of new drivers, schedule conformation and runcutting, and development of new bus stops and signage.

Monitoring An efficient monitoring process can provide significant value for making ongoing service refinements, future operation planning, and can support future budgeting requirements and financial decisions. Two types of monitoring are recommended to assure the continued effectiveness and efficiency of transit services for Transfort – trend analysis and peer system comparisons. Trend analysis compares current operating data with

August 2009 ES-22

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

historical data to establish trends in service efficiency and effectiveness. Peer system analysis can be conducted on an annual basis using statistics from other sister agencies and the National Transit Database (NTD). Ideally, the peer group should be selected based on some common characteristics such as population of the area, existence of educational institutions, system fleet size, annual vehicle hours or annual vehicle miles of service.

Performance standards for three representative transit agencies were reviewed to examine other typical procedures for service monitoring. Representative agencies included the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) in Atlanta, Georgia, the Regional Transportation District in Denver, Colorado, and Pierce Transit in Tacoma, Washington. Each agency uses similar monitoring tools, statistics and metrics to document their relative route productivity and performance. However, the methods employed for making decisions on service adjustments or changes differ somewhat among agencies. The case studies provide a good range of techniques for grading route performance and categorizing routes based on relative levels of efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Transfort may choose to tailor similar measures specifically to their current goals and objectives for system performance.

Future Action Items A set of action items have been developed to guide the key steps for future phased service implementation. These items listed below will include responsibilities among Transfort, the City of Fort Collins and future transit service partners.

• Confirm the feasibility of route changes and new facilities based on physical opportunities and constraints. This includes all street configurations used for new transit routes, the University Avenue transitway on the CSU campus and the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. • Develop transit service standards or guidelines for remaining Enhanced Travel Corridors. • Undertake a feasibility study regarding the establishment of a regional transit provider to provide services for two or more jurisdictions in the North Front Range with a completion date by December 31, 2010 if resources are available. • Identify potential future funding sources that will be sought for plan implementation. • Initiate discussions with potential downtown Fort Collins partners to implement the recommended circulator route. • Undertake discussions with the Poudre School District regarding a negotiated agreement for a transit service partnership. • Initiate discussions with potential partner jurisdictions for the implementation of new regional services. • Develop new performance standards and a formalized transit system performance monitoring program. • Initiate federal funding applications for future transit system capital requirements.

August 2009 ES-23

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary – Transfort Technical Report

This page intentionally left blank.

August 2009 ES-24

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 1 – Transfort Technical Report 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Project Partners The Transit Strategic Plan (TSP) process represents a collaborative partnership between the City of Fort Collins – Transfort, City of Loveland Transit (COLT), and the Poudre School District (PSD). The planning effort focused on fostering a dialogue within and between communities, and exploring innovative strategies to meet the diverse transit needs of the sub-regional area and of the PSD High School attendance boundaries. A financial plan was also crafted to address regional funding sources and governance for the delivery of public transit services.

1.2. Project Background and Purpose The purpose of this project is to prepare an updated Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP), which serves the Fort Collins urbanized area, and to address the adopted Fort Collins City Plan Policies related to transit services. The 2009 TSOP is an update to the 2002 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP) adopted by the Fort Collins City Council. Undertaking the 2009 TSOP update was approved by Fort Collins City Council as part of the 2008/2009 Budgeting for Outcomes process to be completed by the end of 2009.

Although the TSP process represents a collaborative effort between the City of Fort Collins, the City of Loveland, and the PSD, separate documents have been created in order to simplify the plan adoption process. This document presents the TSOP update in the context of Fort Collins and PSD. A separate document has been developed to present the TSP in the context of Loveland, and an update of the 2004 COLT Transit Plan. Both documents follow the same organizational structure, and provide information relevant to the separate geographic areas at the same level of detail. Regional services are described for each community that they serve. Each report also includes an implementation plan, which outlines the recommendations developed by a joint Citizens Financial Advisory Committee (FAC). The implementation approach also discusses administrative and governance options that have been explored for a new regional service provider.

The Transfort 2002 TSOP focused on increasing ridership productivity in high density transit corridors through four service phases. All of Phase 1 and a portion of Phase 2 have already been completed. Phase 1 outlined short-term service improvements, which were completed in 2002. The completed portion of Phase 2 included select improvements implemented on the Harmony, Timberline, and Prospect corridors in 2007. The remaining elements of Phase 2 and all of Phases 3 and 4 are re-addressed as part of the current 2009 TSOP update. The portion of Phase 2 to be addressed in the current 2009 TSOP update involves adaptation to the planned Mason Corridor bus rapid transit (BRT) express service, now referred to as MAX, which is scheduled to begin service in 2011. Phases 3 and 4 of the previous plan prescribed the transition to a grid route system.

August 2009 1

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 1 – Transfort Technical Report

The project purpose for the 2009 TSOP update includes the following elements:

• Communicate transit opportunities and challenges to the community and region • Review existing fixed-route service and performance standards • Update the current Transfort strategy for the development of a grid system that began in the 2002 TSOP and identify opportunities for new routes and regional connections • Evaluate opportunities for public transit to relieve high school student busing needs for PSD • Coordinate transit service with the planned Mason Corridor MAX • Develop partnerships among project agencies • Provide information needed for the City of Fort Collins Transportation and City Plan Updates (2009/2010) • Identify funding mechanisms to implement TSOP update goals and identify a practical phasing approach that can be undertaken with incremental funding • Update transit system financial plans for Fort Collins and address financial solutions required to create and sustain a high-performing transit system

The TSOP update advocates for an enhanced transit system for the communities of Fort Collins and Loveland. There are many benefits to be realized for communities with a robust public transportation system in place. Some of these are outlined here:

• Reduction in fuel consumption: Transit use can reduce the amount individuals spend on fuel, and can reduce the United States’ dependence on foreign oil. • Reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and carbon dioxide emissions: It is estimated that the existing Transfort system reduces VMT by over 12 million- miles annually, and reduces carbon dioxide emissions by nearly 5,000 tons annually. It also estimated that implementation of the full build-out recommendations in the TSOP update could result in just under 11,000 fewer tons of carbon dioxide. • Relief of congestion: Public transportation reduces congestion and associated issues related to congestion (air quality degradation, hostile pedestrian environments, etc). • Mobility for seniors, low-income populations, and those without access to a vehicle: Public transportation is often the only travel mode available to seniors and those with low incomes. Larimer County is projected to see a 115% increase in the number of individuals over the age of 60 by 2020. This increase will have an effect on the demand for transit in the future. Larimer County also currently is home to over 34,000 individuals living below the poverty line. These individuals often rely on transit for mobility. • Builds and maintains a strong economy: Transit saves individuals money and enhances economic opportunity. It also helps to stimulate the economy through capital investments and ongoing operating and maintenance needs.

August 2009 2

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 1 – Transfort Technical Report

• Increases economic development opportunities: Investment in transit can provide a catalyst for increases in development and real estate values. Transit fosters more livable communities and can attract development and redevelopment opportunities. • Reduces the need for an expansion of street networks: Transit use reduces roadway-related costs for maintenance, right-of-way acquisition, and construction.

1.3. Project Goals and Objectives The project team developed six primary goals to guide the development of the 2009 TSOP update and to meet the purpose of the project. These goals were aligned with adopted City of Fort Collins policies that were defined as part of other city plans. The six project goals, along with the City of Fort Collins Policies that are addressed by each goal, are outlined below.

Goal #1: Develop and expanded transit system focused on productivity and performance to serve the Fort Collins area that meets the following Fort Collins City Plan Policies:

Fort Collins Principle T-1: The physical organization of the City will be supported by a framework of transportation alternatives that balances access, mobility, safety, and emergency responses throughout the city, while working towards reducing the rate of growth of vehicle miles of travel and dependence on the private automobile.

Fort Collins Principle T-2: Mass transit will be an integral part of the City’s overall transportation system.

Fort Collins Policy T-2.1 – Transit System. The City’s public transit system will be expanded in phases to provide integrated, high-frequency, productivity-based transit service along major transportation corridors, with feeder transit lines connecting all major district destinations, consistent with adopted transit plans.

Fort Collins Policy T-2.2 – Transit Stops. Transit stops will be integrated into existing and future business districts and Neighborhood Commercial Centers in a way that makes it easy for transit riders to shop, access local services, and travel to work.

Fort Collins Policy T-2.3 – Transit Route Design. The City will implement fixed-route transit services through a phased transition to a productivity- based system, where appropriate, consistent with the adopted transit plans.

Fort Collins Principle T-10: The City will participate in a coordinated, regional approach to transportation planning.

August 2009 3

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 1 – Transfort Technical Report

Fort Collins Policy T-10.4 – Future Regional Transit Service. The City will work cooperatively with the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization and other northern Colorado communities to identify opportunities to provide regional transit connections along regionally significant transportation corridors.

Fort Collins Policy T-10.5 – Interregional Transit Corridors. The City will work cooperatively with regional partners to identify opportunities to provide interregional transit connectivity along the Front Range.

Goal #2: Meet and exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal for Transportation CO2 reductions by 2020.

Goal #3: Provide enhanced mobility for seniors, youth, disabled, and transit dependent.

Goal #4: Develop a public transportation system that reduces roadway related costs for maintenance, right-of-way acquisition, and construction.

Goal #5: Provide funding recommendations to fully implement the Transit Strategic Plan.

Goal #6: Stimulate the local economy through investment in public transportation infrastructure and operations.

1.4. Study Process The TSOP update was undertaken in several key steps, which are summarized below.

Collection of Community Input. Community input was integral to the development of the TSOP update and was incorporated throughout the process. The input provided integral feedback on what works well with the existing transit system, deficiencies that may exist, and desired needs among the community. Several formats for public involvement were used including public meetings, committee briefings, stakeholder interviews (including bus drivers and PSD principals), and presentations to special interest groups, boards and commissions. Chapter 3 provides a more detailed summary of the overall public involvement process.

Review of Related Plans and Studies. The goals, objectives, and recommendations from related plans and studies were reviewed and elements were incorporated into the TSOP update. Particular attention was given to the outcomes of the 2002 TSOP and the Loveland-COLT 2004 Transit Plan. A summary of all related plans and studies is provided in Appendix A.

Evaluation of Existing Transit Market. A review of current land use density demographic information, traffic conditions and the distribution of existing ridership by fare category was undertaken.

August 2009 4

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 1 – Transfort Technical Report

Consideration of Growth Patterns. An analysis of current and projected growth patterns was conducted in order to understand areas in particular need for transit. Demographic indicators of transit dependency were also evaluated.

Assessment of Existing Transit Services and Conditions. An assessment of the productivity and performance of existing Transfort services was undertaken in order to identify areas in need of improvement or refinement.

Development of Initial Transit Service Concepts. Initial transit concepts were developed based on several factors including operating concepts, TSOP update Goals and Objectives, and funding resources. Figure 1 illustrates this process. The regional coordination of services was also considered.

Identification of Opportunities to Phase Transit Improvements. Opportunities to implement transit improvements in phases were identified.

Screening of Initial Concepts and Identification of Recommended Strategy. As shown in Figure 1, initial concepts were screened based on factors related to productivity, cost effectiveness, phasing and funding potential. This resulted in refinement of transit concepts and the identification of a recommended strategy.

Figure 1. Transit Service Concept Development Process

Source: DEA

August 2009 5

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 1 – Transfort Technical Report

Integration of PSD Transportation Needs. Throughout the process, PSD transportation needs were evaluated and integrated into the TSOP update. High school student enrollment boundaries and student home addresses were used to evaluate the effectiveness of existing and proposed transit services in meeting student travel needs.

Evaluation of Funding and Governance Options. The Citizen FAC worked throughout the second half of the project to evaluate a range of funding mechanisms and governance options that could enable the implementation of the TSOP update. The FAC was comprised of representatives from both Fort Collins and Loveland. A set of funding recommendations were advanced by the committee, along with a proposal for further investigation of a regional transit service provider. Chapter 7 provides a summary of the FAC roles, processes and outcomes.

Update and Adoption of the TSOP Update. The recommendations as part of the updated draft Transit Strategic Plan for Transfort and COLT were presented to boards, committees, city councils and the public through a series of meetings and work sessions.

Figure 2 provides an overview of the project schedule, culminating with the adoption of the TSOP update. The recommendations presented in the TSOP update were presented in two final public meetings held in April 2009. The recommendations have also been presented to Fort Collins and Loveland City Councils as part of formal Work Sessions and Meetings. Chapter 4 contains a more detailed list of these meetings. The TSOP update is scheduled for adoption in August 2009.

August 2009 6

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 1 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 2. Project Schedule

Source: DEA

August 2009 7

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 1 – Transfort Technical Report

This page intentionally left blank.

August 2009 8

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS

Chapter 2 provides an overview of existing transit markets, existing and programmed transit services and facilities, and current marketing efforts. It also provides an assessment of the existing transit system performance for Transfort and PSD.

The Transfort system provides fixed local route and paratransit service in the City of Fort Collins with a connecting regional route (the FoxTrot) to Loveland. The description of the system in this chapter is applicable to the Transfort system as of September 2008. Several near-term improvements were implemented in March 2009. These near- term improvements were based on preliminary recommendations made as part of this study and are not reflected in Chapter 2. The near-term improvements are described in detail along with the proposed phased service concepts in Chapter 5.

The existing Transfort System (as of September 2008) is described in Section 2.2. Several data sources were used to complete the summary and evaluation of existing transit services. Data used to support this evaluation include: route schedules; operator run cuts and route service statistics; monthly ridership and farebox reports from July 2007 through June 2008; and ridecheck survey data collected on April 30, 2008 (when CSU was in-session). Detailed profiles of each of the existing Transfort Routes can be found in Appendix B.

Transfort is administered and operated by the City of Fort Collins under the Planning, Development, and Transportation service unit. The department is governed by the City Council which consists of six district Council members, the Mayor, and the Mayor Pro Tem. Transfort currently has 27 full-time administrative staff and 61 operators.

2.1. Existing Transit Market

2.1.1. Fare Categories and Transfer Policy An overview of Transfort’s current fare structure and available special passes is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Fare Structure – Transfort (including FoxTrot)

Fare Category Cash Fare Special Passes Adult – Single-ride $1.25 10-ride booklet: $9.00 Monthly pass: $25.00 Annual pass: $154.00 Senior (60+), Disabled, and $0.60 Annual: $25.00 Medicare Cardholders Youth (17 and under) FREE FREE

August 2009 9

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Fare Category Cash Fare Special Passes CSU Students (full-time) with FREE FREE CSU/Transfort pass Dial-A-Ride (per one-way trip) $2.50 N/A

Source: Transfort

In addition to those passes identified in the above table, Transfort offers the “PassFort” program, which allows employers to purchase their employee’s an annual bus pass at a discounted rate of $50 per pass. PassFort passes can be used on any Transfort service, including the FoxTrot regional route.

All transfers between Transfort routes and FoxTrot are free of charge. Each transfer is valid for one hour. Transfers between Transfort and COLT are also free of charge.

An inventory of ridership by fare category was conducted as part of this project to identify the transit user markets that are currently served by Transfort. Figure 3 displays the distribution of total ridership among each fare category. Student (PSD) and CSU-related riders account for nearly 60% of total passengers. Ridership on some routes is dominated by particular fare category riders. For instance, Routes 2, 3, and 11 exhibit very high use by CSU pass-holders due to the access provided between campus and student housing locations. Routes 91 and 92 are nearly 100% utilized by those using Youth fares. Route 9 also exhibits high youth ridership with approximately 60% of riders using Youth fares.

Approximately 350,000 youth trips were paid for by the Bohemian Foundation. The Bohemian Foundation has provided the City of Fort Collins a grant to subsidize the Youth Fare Program. The Youth Fare Program allows youths ages 17 and younger to ride Transfort buses for free. A recent on-board survey of Youth Fare riders was completed in January 2008 to help understand user demographics and assess the importance of the grant to youth 17 and under. The survey was conducted by Communication Science, Inc. and the results are available in a separate report (a summary of the On-Board Survey of Youth Fare-Free Riders is available in Appendix A).

Route 5 has the highest level of Senior/Disabled riders with nearly 33% using Senior/Disabled fares. Transfort has experienced an 84% increase in use of the wheelchair lift buses between 2007 and 2008. This may be correlated with the reduction of paratransit service coverage in select areas. Use of the Bike-n-Ride program has also increased, by 41%.

The average system-wide transfer rate on Transfort services is approximately 8%, although this percentage does not capture pass users (which include all CSU-related riders). Routes 14 and 17, which serve the eastern-most areas of Fort Collins, were found to have the highest transfer rates (over 20%). Routes 2, 3, and 11 were found to have the lowest transfer activity (not including Routes 91 and 92 that serve PSD).

August 2009 10

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 3. Percentage of Ridership by Fare Category

Source: Transfort

2.2. Existing Transit Services Transfort implemented several changes to routes as part of the March 2009 service update in response to near-term improvements that were recommended as part of this study. These near-term improvements are considered to be part of Phase 1 recommendations and are outlined in Chapter 5 of this report. The existing Transfort system presented in this section is consistent with operations as of September 2008, before the service updates were implemented.

The Transfort system provides fixed-route service in the City of Fort Collins, with a connecting route (FoxTrot) to Loveland. Over 70,000 annual revenue hours were provided in 2008 for fixed-route service. An additional 25,000 revenue hours of paratransit service were also provided. Service is provided Monday through Saturday and generally begins between 6:00 and 6:30 AM, with the last trip scheduled to depart between 6:30 and 7:00 PM. Transfort operates 18 routes when CSU and PSD are in- session and 14 routes when schools are not in-session. Twenty-three fixed-route buses operate in peak service. Two routes (Routes 3 and 11) operate only when CSU are in- session and two routes (Route 91 and 92) provide afternoon service when PSD is in- session. Routes 91 and 92 are referred to as “Tripper” Routes, meaning that bus trips are part of regularly scheduled public transit services and are deigned to accommodate the needs of students and school personnel using a variety of fare collection or subsidy systems. Tripper routes must be clearly marked as open to the public and may stop only at a regular transit stop. Select routes also operate more frequently during the school year. In addition, Transfort operates supplemental (“trailer”) trips on select routes when CSU is in-session to serve surges in demand during peak commute and student arrival/departure hours. The existing Transfort system is shown in Figure 4.

August 2009 11

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 4. Existing Transfort System (as of September 2008)

Source: Transfort and DEA

August 2009 12

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

As part of the 2002 TSOP process, the City of Fort Collins established a preferred service philosophy under which Transfort operates. As shown in Figure 5, the Fort Collins City Council has formally adopted a service philosophy that focuses on productivity, meaning that bus routes focus on areas with higher ridership potential. This philosophy places less emphasis on providing transit coverage to all areas of the community, some of which have significantly lower demand for transit services. This service philosophy was adopted as part of the 2002 TSOP, and was carried forward into other planning documents such as the Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan (2004) and the Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan (2004).

Figure 5. Transfort Service Philosophy

Source: Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, 2002

Table 2 summarizes key service characteristics for existing Transfort local and regional routes (as of September 2009). Several of these routes operate in interlined configurations, meaning that the same buses are used to serve two separate routes that have a common connection with one another. Interlined routes include the following:

• Routes 1 and 15 are interlined at the Downtown Transit Center (DTC). • Route 16 trip is interlined with a Route 6 trip at South Transit Center (STC) (Route 16 operates at 30-minute frequencies and Route 6 operates at 60-minute frequencies). • Routes 9 and 14 are interlined at the DTC. • Routes 17 and 18 are interlined at Midpoint Drive and Sharp Point Drive.

August 2009 13

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 2. Existing Routes – Service Characteristics

Weekday Peak Service Frequency Saturday Route Service Route Pattern Span of Service (minutes) # Frequency CSU In- CSU Not (minutes) Session In-Session Local Services 1 FRCC to DTC via College 6:18 AM – 7:26 PM 20 20 20 22 Prospect/Elizabeth 6:22 AM – 6:40 PM 30 30 30 (clockwise) 32 Elizabeth/Prospect 6:50 AM – 6:40 PM 30 n/a n/a (counter-clockwise) 4 LaPorte/Mulberry Loop 6:15 AM – 4:09 PM 30 30 n/a (counter-clockwise) 5 STC to DTC via Lemay 6:24 AM – 7:15 PM 60 60 60 6 STC to CSU via Horsetooth, 6:15 AM – 7:10 PM 60 60 60 Dunbar, and Shields 7 STC to CSU via Stover, 6:45 AM – 6:39 PM 30 60 60 Drake, and Centre 8 DTC to CTC Loop (via 6:22 AM – 6:49 PM 30 30 30 College and Lemay) 9 Vine/LaPorte (counter- 6:52 AM – 6:15 PM 60 60 60 clockwise) 112 Laurel/Elizabeth/Plum 6:58 AM – 6:18 PM 20 n/a n/a 14 Lincoln/Mulberry 6:20 AM – 6:51 PM 60 60 60 15 DTC to CSU via Meldrum 6:14 AM – 6:53 PM 20 20 20 16 STC to Corbett & Harmony 6:20 AM – 6:41 PM 30 30 60 17 Corbett & Harmony to 6:45 AM – 7:36 PM 60 60 60 Midpoint & Prospect 18 DTC to Midpoint & Prospect 6:05 AM – 7:14 PM 60 60 60 911 Lincoln Jr. High School 2:35 PM – 2:50 PM 1 trip n/a n/a 921 Poudre High School 3:05 PM – 3:25 PM 1 trip n/a n/a Regional Services Fox FoxTrot – STC to Orchards 6:17 AM – 7:11 PM 60 60 60 Center

Source: Transfort

1Routes 91 and 92 operate only when PSD schools are in-session. 2Routes 2, 3, and 11 include “trailer” trips when CSU is in-session

August 2009 14

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Paratransit Dial-A-Ride service currently operates between the hours of 6:00 AM and 11:00 PM Monday through Saturday within a specific service area. The Dial-A-Ride service area is defined as ¾-mile from any fixed bus route. Dial-A-Ride service provides complimentary access for individuals with disabilities that prevent them from riding fixed-route service in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

2.3. Other Public Transportation Services and Programs within the Transfort Service Area

2.3.1. SMARTTrips SMARTTrips is a division of the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO). The SMARTTTrips program provides resources, information, and incentives to help individuals in the North Front Range to travel as often as possible by alternative modes. SMARTTrip services vary by municipality, but generally include programs that encourage use of transit, bicycle, walking, and teleworking. Two special programs are operated through SMARTTrips:

• VanGo: This program encourages commuters with a common destination to form a vanpool group. Vanpool members pay a monthly fee that covers the cost of the van, fuel, maintenance, and insurance. Driving responsibility is shared and negotiated amongst vanpool members. • CarGo: SMARTTrips maintains a database of commuters traveling to and from the North Front Range who are looking to carpool with others.

2.3.2. Greyhound Greyhound offers intercity bus service to many cities throughout the North Front Range including two trips from Fort Collins to downtown Denver and two return trips to Fort Collins. Greyhound has one station location in Fort Collins at the Transfort Downtown Transit Center at 250 North Mason Street.

2.3.3. SuperShuttle (formerly Shamrock Airport Express) The SuperShuttle provides hourly service between the hours of 3 AM and Midnight at five stops in Fort Collins: the CSU Transit Center, Marriott Hotel (350 Horsetooth), Holiday Inn Express (1426 Oakridge), the Courtyard Marriott (1200 Oakridge), and the Harmony Transfer Center/park and ride at Harmony and I-25.

2.3.4. Seniors Alternatives IN Transportation (SAINT) SAINT is a non-profit agency that provides personal transportation to people 60 years and older, and people with disabilities that prevent them from driving. SAINT is

August 2009 15

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report operated by volunteers who donate their time and use of their vehicles. Volunteers in Fort Collins and Loveland provided over 20,000 rides to their neighbors in 2008.

2.3.5. Transit Services in Neighboring Cities Transfort operates a regional service, the FoxTrot, which provides service to Loveland. The City of Loveland’s transit service, COLT, provides three routes. The NFRMPO provides a regional service to Loveland, Route 34-Xpress.

2.4. Existing and Programmed Equipment and Facilities

2.4.1. Vehicle Fleet Transfort owns and maintains 44 vehicles as part of its fleet. This includes 26 standard 40-foot transit buses, four mid-sized 35-foot transit buses and 13 paratransit vehicles. An overview of the vehicles in the Transfort fleet is provided in Table 3.

Table 3. Transfort Vehicle Fleet

Seated Standing Fuel Replace- Quantity Year Manufacturer Notes Capacity Capacity Type ment Year Fixed-Route Bio- 1 inactive 6 1993 Gillig Phantom 37 28 2010 Diesel vehicle Bio - 1 1994 Gillig Phantom 30 20 2010 Diesel Bio- 5 1997 Gillig Phantom 35 37 2010-2011 Diesel Bio- 4 1998 Gillig Phantom 43 26 2012 Diesel Gillig Low- Bio- 6 2001 28 22 2014-2019 Floor Diesel El Dorado Bio- 1 2005 30 20 2017 Low-Floor Diesel Flexible 40-ft Bio- 4 1991 43 26 2010 Bus Diesel NABI 3 2008 37 23 CNG 2020 35LFW3510.01 1 2009 NABI 40LFW 37 23 CNG 2021 Dial-A-Ride 1999 Bio- All 3 3 Ford E450 12 N/A 2006 Diesel inactive

August 2009 16

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Seated Standing Fuel Replace- Quantity Year Manufacturer Notes Capacity Capacity Type ment Year 2001 Bio- 2 inactive 6 Ford E450 12 N/A 2006 Diesel vehicles 2003 Bio- 2 Ford E450 12 N/A 2010 Diesel 2007 Ford Senator 2 14 N/A CNG 2012 E350

Source: Transfort

2.4.2. Transit Centers Transfort has three transit centers that facilitate transfers to/from routes and bus layover/schedule recovery time. All routes except for Route 17 serve at least one of Transfort’s three transit centers. These existing facilities are illustrated on Figure 4 and include the following:

• Downtown Transit Center (DTC) – The DTC is located in downtown Fort Collins at the corner of Mason Street and Maple Street • South Transit Center (STC) – The STC is located at the Square at Foothills Mall • CSU Transit Center – This transit center is located on campus at the Lory Student Center

The STC will be relocated to a location off of Fairway Lane as part of the Mason Corridor project. Funding has been secured for the new STC as part of a grant from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) SB-1 Transit Funding program. The relocation of the STC is described in more detail in Chapter 5.

2.5. Existing Marketing Program Ridership on the Transfort system has generally reflected an upward trend over the last ten years. Ridership increased 11% from 2006 and 2007 and 15% between 2007 and 2008. This growth can be attributed to several factors including increased and more targeted marketing efforts.

Bus schedules are currently updated and produced twice a year. They are distributed to approximately 30 key locations around the city on a monthly basis. Marketing surveys have indicated that distribution of bus schedules is the most effective way to inform people about local bus service. There are three primary ways in which distribution occurs. Schedules are delivered to businesses and high-density residential complexes located along all 18 bus routes. Temporary employees are hired to travel with bus operators to pick up any old schedules and deliver new ones. In addition, letters are mailed to approximately 3,000 businesses to notify them that new bus schedules are available. Businesses are encouraged to request schedules from Transfort if they are interested. Schedules can also be requested by phone.

August 2009 17

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Transfort marketing has used traditional and non-traditional strategies to promote ridership among CSU students. All full-time fee-paying CSU students are eligible to receive annual bus passes. Transfort encourages use of these passes by emphasizing the convenience of riding the bus and the financial savings in gasoline and parking costs. Transfort staff is especially active in building awareness of Transfort during early fall semester at events that include the Resident Assistant Resource Fair, Ramapalooza, and the freshman dorm check-in.

Transfort also targets employee-based programs to bolster ridership. The PassFort, CSU PassFort, and Test Ride Transfort passes are advertised as a way to save money, as well as a way to support ClimateWise initiatives and reduce the environmental impacts associated with personal vehicle use. Transfort also participates in joint business community events with ClimateWise to increase awareness of transit benefits for employees and the community. Transfort also emphasizes that its system is a reliable travel mode, thus providing a more dependable workforce.

2.6. Assessment of Existing Transit System Performance As shown in Figure 6, Transfort ridership continues to increase each year. Nearly 1.9 million riders were served between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2008 on its fixed-route system. Ridership is expected to continue to grow as demand for alternative modes increases. An assessment of existing Transfort services and facilities is outlined in this section.

August 2009 18

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 6. Transfort Annual Ridership (Total Passenger Trips), 1998-2008

Source: Transfort

2.6.1. Route and System Productivity The productivity and effectiveness of the existing Transfort system was assessed in order to identify service efficiencies and potential areas for improvements within the system. Several methods of analysis were employed. Annual ridership was evaluated on the system and route levels. Productivity measures were then developed and applied to the route level and overall system in order to assess the effectiveness of each route. Finally, ridership information by stop was summarized based on a ridecheck survey conducted in April 2008. Taken together, this information provides the basis for several conclusions and recommendations for the TSOP update.

From July 2007 to June 2008, Transfort recorded an average of approximately 5,300 trips every day. Transfort ridership varies significantly depending on whether or not CSU is in-session. On average, weekday ridership is 73% higher when CSU is in- session than when it is out of session. As a result, Transfort’s lowest ridership months are June and July. The highest ridership months, in descending order, are February, April, September, October, March and November.

A summary of key operational statistics and productivity measures for each route and for the system is provided for weekdays in Table 4 and for Saturday in Table 5. Daily service hours, daily service miles, and average daily boardings are reported in order to give a sense for the magnitude of service provided by each route. Three measures of

August 2009 19

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

service productivity are also included in the table. Riders per hour, riders per mile, and riders per trip are reported in order to indicate the relative productivity of each route. These key measures were analyzed separately for the months in which CSU is in- session and the months in which CSU is not in-session. Productivity measures were not developed for Routes 91 and 92 since theses routes operate only one trip per day. Route level ridership is also shown in Figures 7 and 8. Comprehensive route profiles that describe existing Transfort routes can be found in Appendix B.

Several conclusions can be drawn from the assessment of route productivity measures. The following issues were taken into consideration as part of the TSOP update proposed service concept development process.

• Routes 11 and 1 have the highest overall weekday ridership. Both carry an average of over 1,000 riders daily when in-service. Route 11 only operates when CSU is in-session. • Route 1 has the highest weekday ridership when CSU is not in-session, with an average of over 1,000 riders daily. Routes 8 and 2 have the next highest ridership and carry just fewer than 400 riders per average weekday. • Routes 4 and 17 have the lowest weekday ridership whether or not CSU is in- session (excluding Routes 91 and 92 which provide one trip per day to Lincoln Junior High school and Poudre High School respectively). • When CSU is in-session, Route 11 demonstrates the best weekday performance across all three measures (riders per hour, riders per mile, and riders per trip). Routes 2, 3, and 6 are the next highest performing routes on weekdays for all three measures. • When CSU is not in-session, Routes 8, 2, and FoxTrot have the highest weekday riders per hour. Routes 15, 8, and 2 have the highest number of riders per mile, and Routes 2, 8, and 1 have the highest number of riders per trip. • Routes 4 and 17 are consistently the lowest performing routes on weekdays, whether or not CSU was in-session. These routes demonstrate the lowest indicators across all three performance measures. Other low performing routes include Route 15 (low number of riders per trip), 16 (low across all three measures) and 18 (low number of riders per mile). • Routes 1, 8, and FoxTrot have the highest Saturday ridership whether or not CSU is in-session. Route 1 carries nearly 800 average Saturday riders and Route 8 and FoxTrot carry over 250 average Saturday riders. • Routes 17 and 9 have the lowest Saturday ridership whether or not CSU is in- session. Route 17 carries an average of 60 riders and Route 9 carries just over 100 riders on Saturdays when CSU is in-session • On Saturdays when CSU is in-session, Route 3 demonstrates the best weekday performance in all three measures. Other consistently high performing routes include Route 8 (high in all three measures, Route 2 (high riders per hour and riders per trip), and Route 15 (high riders per mile and riders per trip).

August 2009 20

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

• On Saturdays when CSU is not in-session, Routes 8 and 14 demonstrate high riders per hour, Routes 15 and 1 demonstrate high riders per mile, and Routes 1 and 6 demonstrate high riders per trip. • Route 17 is consistently the lowest performing route on Saturdays, whether or not CSU is in-session. Other low performing routes when CSU is in-session include Route 16 (low in all three performance measures), Route 7 (low riders per hour and riders per mile), Route 15 (low riders per trip), and Route 18 (low riders per mile). Low performing routes on Saturdays when CSU is not in- session include Route 7 (low riders per hour and riders per mile), Route 15 (low riders per trip), and Route 18 (low in all three measures).

August 2009 21

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2– Transfort Technical Report

Table 4. Key Productivity Measures for Existing System – Weekday

Daily Service Daily Service Average Daily Riders per hour Riders per mile Riders per trip Hours Miles Boardings CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU Out CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- Out of Out of Out of Out of Out of of Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Route # 1 46.6 46.6 490 490 1,071 1,028 23 22.1 2.2 2.1 14.3 13.7 22 14.6 12.3 184.3 161.9 794 375 55.2 30.5 4.3 2.3 27.7 15.0 32 11. 8 na 153.6 na 754 na 63.7 na 4.9 na 26.9 na 4 7.8 7.8 79.8 79.8 138 42 17.7 5.4 1.7 0.5 6.9 2.1 5 12.4 12.4 148.1 148.1 272 271 21.9 21.8 1.8 1.8 10.9 10.8 6 13.0 12.9 197.9 185.9 571 331 43.2 25.6 3.0 1.8 22.8 13.2 7 23.8 11.9 264.7 132.4 417 152 18.2 13.3 1.6 1.2 9.5 6.9 8 12.5 12.5 153 153 410 385 33.0 30.9 2.7 2.5 15.2 14.3 9 5.6 5.6 84.1 84.1 238 136 42.5 24.4 2.8 1.6 19.8 11.4 112 14.5 na 105.0 na 1,380 na 95.4 na 13.1 na 30.0 na 14 6.9 6.9 115.4 115.4 191 186 27.6 26.8 1.7 1.6 7.3 7.1 15 16.5 16.5 104.9 104.9 411 367 24.9 22.3 3.9 3.5 5.4 4.8 16 23.2 23.2 238.1 238.1 292 254 12.6 11.0 1.2 1.1 5.8 5.1 17 12.2 12.2 167.8 167.8 93 101 7.6 8.2 0.6 0.6 3.6 3.9 18 11.5 11.5 142.7 142.7 216 190 18.8 16.5 1.5 1.3 8.3 7.3 911 0.3 na 3.6 na Not calculated 921 0.5 na 4.7 na Not calculated Fox- 12.8 12.8 218.7 218.7 321 371 25.1 29.0 1.5 1.7 12.4 14.3 Trot

August 2009 22

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2– Transfort Technical Report

Daily Service Daily Service Average Daily Riders per hour Riders per mile Riders per trip Hours Miles Boardings CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU Out CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- Out of Out of Out of Out of Out of of Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Route #

246.5 205.1 2,856.4 2,422.8 7,456 4,199 33.1 20.6 3.0 1.7 14. 2 9.3 wide System-

Source: Connetics Transportation Group

1Routes 91 and 92 operate only when PSD schools are in-session. 2Routes 2, 3, and 11 include “trailer” trips when CSU is in-session

August 2009 23

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2– Transfort Technical Report

Table 5. Key Productivity Measures for Existing System – Saturday Daily Service Daily Service Average Daily Riders per mile Riders per trip Miles Riders per hour Hours Boardings CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- Route # Out of Out of Out of Out of Out of Out of Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session 1 46.6 46.6 490 490 799 772 17.1 16.6 1.6 1.6 10.6 10.3 22 12.3 12.3 161.9 161.9 275 199 22.3 16.2 1.7 1.2 11.0 8.0 32 na na na na na na na na na na na na 4 na na na na na na na na na na na na 5 12.4 12.4 148.1 148.1 172 180 13.9 14.5 1.2 1.2 6.9 7.2 6 12.9 12.9 185.9 185.9 228 223 17.6 17.3 1.2 1.2 9.1 8.9 7 11.9 11.9 132.4 132.4 133 110 11.2 9.3 1.0 0.8 5.8 4.8 8 12.5 12.5 153 153 297 234 23.8 18.8 1.9 1.5 11.0 8.7 9 5.6 5.6 84.1 84.1 113 80 20.1 14.3 1.3 1.0 9.4 6.7 112 na na na na na na na na na na na na 14 6.9 6.9 115.4 115.4 151 128 21.8 18.6 1.3 1.1 5.8 4.9 15 16.5 16.5 104.9 104.9 151 128 16.2 12.4 2.5 1.9 3.5 2.7 16 11.3 11.3 121.8 121.8 117 119 10.3 10.5 1.0 1.0 4.7 4.8 17 12.2 12.2 167.8 167.8 60 47 4.9 3.8 0.4 0.3 2.3 1.8 18 11.5 11.5 142.7 142.7 138 108 12.0 9.4 1.0 0.8 5.3 4.1 911 na na na na Not calculated 921 na na na na Not calculated Fox- 12.8 12.8 218.7 218.7 255 227 19.9 17.7 1.2 1.0 9.8 8.7 Trot

August 2009 24

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2– Transfort Technical Report

Daily Service Daily Service Average Daily Riders per mile Riders per trip Miles Riders per hour Hours Boardings CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- CSU In- Route # Out of Out of Out of Out of Out of Out of Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session

185.4 185.4 1,736.6 2,226.6 3,004 2,632 16.3 13.8 1.3 1.1 7.3 6.3 wide System-

Source: Connetics Transportation Group

1Routes 91 and 92 operate only when PSD schools are in-session. 2Routes 2, 3, and 11 include “trailer” trips when CSU is in-session

August 2009 25

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 7. Average Daily Ridership by Route – CSU In-Session

1,500 1,400 WEEKDAY 1,300 SATURDAY 1,200

1,100 ers

g 1,000 900 800 700 Passen

y 600 500

. Dail 400 g 300 Av 200 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 91 92 11 FoxTrot 14 15 16 17 18 Route

Source: Transfort

Figure 8. Average Daily Ridership by Route – CSU Not In-Session

1,100 WEEKDAY 1,000 SATURDAY 900

800 ers g 700

600

Passen 500 y 400

. Dail 300 g

Av 200

100

0 1 2 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 91 92 11 FoxTrot 14 15 16 17 18 Route

Source: Transfort

1 Route only operates when CSU is in-session 2 Route only operates when PSD schools are in-session

August 2009 26

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

2.6.2. Stop-Level Productivity Figure 9 depicts weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) at Transfort stops. This data was obtained from a ridecheck survey conducted in April 2008. This survey indicated that the three transit centers generate the most activity of all stops in the Transfort system, together accounting for 44% of all weekday ridership activity. The CSU Transit Center generated 24% of all stop activity, DTC generated 12% and STC generated 8%. Table 6 outlines weekday ridership at the 10 non-transit center stops with the highest ridership activity. The ridecheck indicated that the highest ridership activity experienced at non-transit center stops occurred at stops located throughout the residential areas west of CSU. Other high activity stops are located at the Orchards Shopping Center, Front Range Community College (FRCC), College Avenue at Laurel and Mulberry, Midpoint Drive at Prospect Parkway, Poudre High School Lincoln Jr. High School, and Rocky Mountain High School. The ridecheck survey also indicated that 14 transit stops generated no ridership activity on the survey day, and that 110 stops (26%) had less than 5 boardings or alightings.

Table 6. Weekday Ridership at Top 10 Transit Stops

Weekday Activity Transit Stop Boardings & Alightings Constitution & Elizabeth 414 Ram’s Village West 358 Elizabeth & Taft Hill 306 City Park & Plum 246 Orchards Shopping Center 232 Front Range Community College 188 (two stops) Elizabeth & City Park 137 Elizabeth & Overland 129 Ram’s Village East 128 Elizabeth & Ram’s Point 127

Source: Connetics Transportation Group

August 2009 27

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 9. Weekday Ridership Activity by Stop

Source: Connetics Transportation Group

August 2009 28

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report 2.7. Summary The technical analysis of the existing Transfort system was integral in the development of the TSOP update recommendations. Another key input into the TSOP update process was information gathered from Transfort bus operators, as well as PSD principals. Input from bus operators was vital to the service concept development process. PSD principals were able to provide input that was helpful in developing service concepts to appropriately serve PSD high schools.

The productivity and effectiveness of the existing routes were considered in an effort to identify those routes which are most efficient, those that are underperforming, and routes which are not able to accommodate high demand. The physical alignment of existing routes was also evaluated to identify routes which are too circuitous in nature, or are not serving key transit markets. A summary of key issues related to the existing system is presented below.

• CSU accounts for over one-third of Transfort’s total riders. Total system ridership increases by 73% when CSU is in-session. The TSOP update considered this fact by bolstering service between CSU and key student trip generators. • Existing Transfort Routes 2, 3, and 11 are all high-performing routes that operate using “trailer” trips during high demand periods. The TSOP update process evaluated whether trailer trips are the most effective means of addresses high demand and considered alternate strategies. • Transfort services currently operate under a limited service span and lower 30- and 60-minute frequencies. The TSOP update evaluated the limitations of the current service characteristics and provides recommendations for the introduction of early and late evening service, limited Sunday service, and improved service frequencies. • Existing Transfort Routes 4, 16, and 17 have the lowest productivity of all Transfort routes. Improvements to these routes have been evaluated in the TSOP update in order to improve productivity. • Approximately 110 Transfort stops showed very low ridership activity (five boardings or alightings or less). Several Loveland stops also exhibited low transit use. This information was used in the TSOP update to guide the reconfiguration of underperforming routes.

The project team met with Transfort bus drivers in August 2008 in order to obtain input on current efficiencies, inefficiencies and shortcomings in the system. This input was integrated into the TSOP update process and considered in the development of the TSOP update recommendations. Many of the driver recommendations were also implemented as part of the March 2009 Near-Term Improvements (see Chapter 5 for an explanation of these improvements). A summary of the input received from these interviews includes:

August 2009 29

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

• Better connections between routes, improved service frequency, and potential improvements to route alignments are needed in order to increase effectiveness. These comments were integrated into the TSOP update. • Route 6 operates at service frequencies that are inadequate to meet demand for the route and it frequently has problems with on-time performance. The TSOP update addresses both of these issues by reconfiguring existing Route 6. • Problems related to the interlining of Routes 9 and 14 exist. There is not adequate schedule recovery time built into the schedule. This issue is integrated into the TSOP update recommendations. • The FoxTrot has issues with on-time performance due to congestion and off-line route deviations. This is problematic since many riders transfer from the FoxTrot to other Transfort and Loveland routes at the STC and Orchards Shopping Center respectively. Since the FoxTrot operates at 60-minute frequencies, riders are forced to wait an hour when missing a connection. This issue is addressed in the TSOP update.

The project team also met with Poudre School District (PSD) principles in Fall 2008 in order to gain perspective on how Transfort could meet PSD markets and needs. This input was integrated into the TSOP update process, and was used in the development of service concept recommendations. A summary of PSD principal comments is provided below.

• There will be significant transportation impact when 9th graders begin attending high schools in Fall 2009. Approximately 1,800 9th grade students will attend PSD high schools. • There is a need for student transport outside of the home-to-school and school- to-home travel, including after school activities, field trips, and travel to CSU and Front Range Community College (FRCC) for special classes. • More direct service between PSD schools, CSU, and FRCC is desired. • Improved coordination between Transfort operating schedules and high school start and end times is needed. • The possibility of selling Transfort passes at high schools should be explored further.

2.8. Poudre School District (PSD) PSD serves approximately 24,000 students in 50 schools. School bus transportation and Transfort service combine to meet the needs of students attending the four PSD high schools: Poudre High School, Rocky Mountain High School, Fort Collins High School, and Fossil Ridge High School. PSD has partnered in this study in order to identify opportunities to enhance and promote Transfort services to these four high schools. This section outlines existing characteristics of PSD high schools and the school bus transportation system, existing Transfort services that provide access for PSD high school students and an assessment of those existing Transfort services.

August 2009 30

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report 2.8.1. Existing PSD High School Characteristics and School Bus Transportation Over 5,500 students currently attend the four PSD high schools. An estimated 1,800 additional students will be attending the four high schools in fall 2009, when 9th graders will be shifted from junior high schools and integrated into the high schools. These students, who are too young to drive, will place additional demands on PSD transportation services.

Approximately 50% of PSD high school students are currently eligible for school bus service. Students who are eligible for school bus service must live within the defined attendance boundary for that school and must live outside of the defined walk boundary. The defined walk boundary is approximately 2.0-miles from the school, but could be expanded to reach 2.5-miles from the school in the 2009 school year. The possible expansion of PSD walk boundaries is discussed in Chapter 5. Students who attend a school in which they do not live within the attendance boundary are considered “choice” students. Choice students are not eligible for school bus service. Table 7 provides an overview of the school bus eligibility of PSD high school students.

PSD school bus transportation provides 2.1 million-miles and 203,000 hours of service at a cost of approximately $7.2 million per year. The estimated cost per service hour is approximately $35. School bus ridership is not tracked in the same manner as public transit service, so there is no way to evaluate productivity measures such as riders per bus-hours, riders per bus-mile, and riders per trip.

Table 7. School Bus Eligibility of PSD High School Students

Total # of Students # of Students # of Choice Students High School Student within Current Eligible for Not Eligible for Addresses1 Walk Boundary Bussing2 Bussing Poudre 1,721 204 550 967 Rocky Mountain 1,697 751 565 381 Fort Collins 1,160 520 197 443 Fossil Ridge 1,210 239 497 474 Total 5,788 1,714 1,809 2,265

Source: DEA

1 Total Student Addresses are reported for the 2007-2008 school year. These values do not reflect actual school attendance since not all student addresses are known. 2 Students are eligible for bussing if they live within the school's attendance boundary and are outside of the designated 2.0 mile walk boundary

August 2009 31

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report 2.8.2. Existing Transfort Service to PSD High Schools Transfort routes are generally not specifically dedicated or oriented to the high schools, except for Routes 91 and 92, which provide one trip each in the afternoon from Lincoln Jr. High and Poudre High schools respectively. However, these routes are still available to the general public. Table 8 provides an overview of Transfort routes that serve PSD high schools.

Table 8. Transfort Routes that Serve PSD High Schools

Weekday High School Route Description Frequency (minutes) One-way loop on Loomis, LaPorte, Taft Hill, 4 30 Mulberry, and Laurel to CSU Transit Center Poudre High One-way loop primarily on LaPorte and Vine 9 60 School between DTC and Overland Trail Afternoon service oriented to Poudre High 92 One trip School North-south on Shields, Stuart, Taft Hill, Drake, Rocky 6 Dunbar and Horsetooth, connecting CSU and 60 Mountain South Transit Centers High School North-south on Center, Drake, and Stover, 7 60 connecting CSU and South Transit Centers Fort Collins 17 North-south, primarily on Timberline 60 High School

Fossil Ridge 16 Between STC and Fossil Ridge High School 30 High School 17 North-south primarily on Timberline 60

Source: RAE Consultants, Inc.

2.8.3. Assessment of Existing Transfort Service to PSD High Schools PSD high school students generate several types of transit trips. The peak period for home-to-school transportation to high schools falls between the hours of 5:50 AM and 7:30 AM. This student peak overlaps with Transfort’s morning peak hours. Therefore, Transfort vehicles are not available to provide additional high school oriented service. The peak period for school-to-home trips from high schools is between the hours of 3:10 PM and 5:00 PM. There is some opportunity to operate additional high school oriented service since this time period does not overlap to the same degree with Transfort’s afternoon/evening peak. Other common PSD student trips include after school trips related to sports and other special events, as well as travel to CSU and Front Range Community College for advanced and/or specialized classes.

August 2009 32

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

An assessment of the effectiveness of Transfort routes serving PSD high schools follows.

Poudre High School • Routes 4, 9, and 92 provide good coverage in the neighborhood immediately surrounding this school. • Much of the Poudre High School attendance boundary is outside of the Transfort service area, limiting the extent to which Transfort is able to provide service to the school. • Route 4 was eliminated as part of system changes that occurred in March 2009 based on preliminary recommendations from this study (Chapter 5 contains a detailed overview of these March 2009 changes). Although the March 2009 changes improved access to PSD schools overall, the elimination of Route 4 did reduce some service coverage related to Poudre High School to/from areas directly southeast of the school.

Rocky Mountain High School • Routes 6 and 7 serve Rocky Mountain High School indirectly. Route 6 operates within a few blocks of the school, but operates on a 60-minute frequency. Accessing Route 7 requires a considerable walk. • Transfort routes provide good area coverage in the neighborhood immediately surrounding this school, but only Route 6 comes close to the high school. • The route changes implemented in March 2009 resulted in the establishment of a new route, Route 19, which provides significantly improved service to Rocky Mountain High School.

Fort Collins High School • One route, Route 17, serves this school. It operates on a 60-minute frequency and does not serve most of the areas where Fort Collins HS students live.

Fossil Ridge High School • Routes 16 and 17 provide service near this school. Route 16 has stops near the school and operates on a 30-minute frequency. However, this route only serves the northwest side of the high school attendance boundary. Route 17 stops within a few blocks of the school, but does not serve the attendance boundary. • Fossil Ridge serves a more affluent area where many high school students have access to private vehicles.

Figure 10 provides an illustration of the coverage that Transfort services provide in relationship to high school attendance boundaries, current walk boundaries and student home locations. The figure illustrates the degree to which Transfort public transit service provides access to student addresses within one half mile of existing routes. This is considered to be the general limits of a reasonable walk distance to reach a transit stop.

August 2009 33

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 2 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 10. Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Existing Transfort Routes (Current Walk Boundaries)

Source: DEA

August 2009 34

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report 3. DEMOGRAPHICS AND COMMUNITY PROFILE 3.1. Community Profile Fort Collins is located 65 miles north of Denver on the banks of the Cache La Poudre River along the North Front Range and is home to approximately 137,000 individuals The city was incorporated in 1873, although much of its development did not occur until the 20th century. Fort Collins is home to Colorado’s second largest university, Colorado State University, with more than 21,000 students. The greatest concentration of commercial activity in Fort Collins is located downtown, also referred to as “Old Town.” Other major attractions include a number of breweries just east of Old Town, Foothills Mall, and numerous outdoor and recreational activities. Fort Collins is also known for its proximity to the Rocky Mountains, including Rocky Mountain National Park.

3.2. Land Use Density Land use densities can have a significant impact on the productivity and effectiveness of transit services. Three land use density characteristics (population density, employment density, and combined population and employment density) were considered for the year 2005 and a future forecast year (2035). This data is collected and forecasted by the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO). Figures 11 through 16 illustrate population densities, employment densities and combined population and employment densities, respectively, for Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) in the Fort Collins area. Density is defined as the number of persons (residents and/or employees) per acre.

As illustrated in Figure 11, the 2005 population density in Fort Collins is concentrated in the residential areas in downtown Fort Collins, as well as the areas west of CSU. By 2035, population density is projected to increase in these same areas, as well as in the vicinity of Mountain Vista and Timberline, which is programmed for mixed land uses and higher densities. As illustrated in Figure 13, the 2005 employment density in Fort Collins is concentrated in downtown Fort Collins, particularly “old town,” on the CSU campus, and along College Avenue and the Mason Corridor. By 2035, employment density is projected to intensify in these same areas, as well as in the vicinity of Mountain Vista and Timberline. As illustrated in Figure 15, the 2005 combined population and employment density in Fort Collins is concentrated in the older established portions of Fort Collins, with less density in the southern portion of town. As already noted, the Mountain Vista area is projected to increase significantly in combined density by 2035. Other portions of Fort Collins are also projected to intensify in density.

August 2009 35

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 11. Fort Collins 2005 Population Density by TAZ

Source: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2009

August 2009 36

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 12. Fort Collins 2035 Population Density by TAZ

Source: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2009

August 2009 37

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 13. Fort Collins 2005 Employment Density by TAZ

Source: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2009

August 2009 38

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 14. Fort Collins 2035 Employment Density by TAZ

Source: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2009

August 2009 39

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 15. Fort Collins 2005 Combined Land Use Density by TAZ

Source: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2009

August 2009 40

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 16. Fort Collins 2035 Combined Land Use Density by TAZ

Source: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2009

August 2009 41

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

3.3. Demographic Information Demographic information, particularly data that reflects transit dependency, can also indicate the potential productivity of transit services. Transit dependent populations often include students, individuals who are not able to drive, or persons that do not have the economic means to own a vehicle. The most recent and reliable data available is from the United States Census completed in 2000. The 2000 Census reports data collected in 1999. An analysis of demographic information for Fort Collins was undertaken in the 2002 TSOP. Figures 17 through 20 are incorporated directly from that plan and illustrate the density of students, seniors, and youth, along with median household income for Census Block Groups in Fort Collins.

Predictably, the highest density of students live near the CSU campus, as illustrated in Figure 17. Figure 18 indicates that individuals ages 17 and younger are most concentrated south and west of downtown Fort Collins. The density of individuals over the age of 60 years is also concentrated in and around downtown Fort Collins (as shown in Figure 19). When reviewing median household income characteristics (see Figure 20), lower income households are somewhat concentrated in central Fort Collins with higher income households in the perimeter areas. These demographic characteristics indicate that transit dependent populations are more focused in the central areas of the City of Fort Collins, but these markets are also distributed throughout the outlying areas. Demographic information was incorporated into the service concept development process.

August 2009 42

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

This page intentionally left blank.

August 2009 43

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 17. Fort Collins Student Density (2000) Figure 18. Fort Collins 1999 Youth Population Density (17 Years and Younger)

Source: Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, 2002

August 2009 44

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 19. Fort Collins 1999 Senior Population Figure 20. Fort Collins Median Household Income Density (60 Years and Older)

Source: Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, 2002

August 2009 45

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

3.4. Traffic Conditions The roadway network in the most established portion of Fort Collins typically functions as a grid network with major arterials approximately every one-mile. The more recently developed portions of Fort Collins tend to contain circuitous routes that are more difficult for transit operations. Figures 21 and 22 use colors to illustrate estimated traffic level of service (LOS) and line widths to indicate the magnitude of volume. The LOS categories range from A to F, with LOS A indicating free flow or uncongested conditions, and LOS F indicating highly congested traffic operations where volumes are near roadway capacity and significant delays occur.

Current and projected traffic conditions were considered in the service concept development process in an effort to identify appropriate roadways for transit service and alternative modes of travel. As shown in Figure 21, the most congested portions of roadway (as of 2005) are along Harmony Rd near Shields, College, and Timberline, and along College near Harmony and near the CSU campus. Congestion and traffic volumes are projected to increase significantly by 2035, as shown in Figure 22. The most congested areas are expected to be found along College, both near CSU/downtown and south of Carpenter. Portions of Harmony are also expected to experience high volumes and congestion, particularly just east of College. Prospect is expected to experience increased congestion as well.

August 2009 46

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

This page intentionally left blank.

August 2009 47

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 21. Congestion and Traffic Volumes in Fort Collins (2005)

Source: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2009

August 2009 48

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 22. Projected Congestion and Traffic Volumes in Fort Collins (2035)

Source: North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2009

August 2009 49

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 3 – Transfort Technical Report

3.5. Related Plans and Studies Several key city plans were reviewed and considered in the TSOP update process. Community visions and goals, as expressed in these plans, helped to drive the development of TSOP update Goals and Objectives and inform the development of future transit concepts. Relevant plans are briefly summarized in Appendix A, and their relationship to the TSOP update process is noted.

The TSOP update process worked to coordinate with several other projects and studies relevant to the Transfort service area. The Mason Corridor BRT project represents a very large transit investment for Transfort and was particularly important in the development of the TSOP update recommendations. Other relevant projects and studies that were considered are also described. These include:

• Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (2002) • City Plan: Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan (1997, updated 2004) • Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan (2004) • City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan (1981, updated 2007) • Fort Collins Climate Action Plan (2008) • North I-25 Draft Environmental Impact Statement • Downtown River District Streetscape Improvement Project & Downtown Circulator Concept • Transfort Bus Rider Survey (2008) • On-Board Survey of Youth Fare-Free Riders (2009)

August 2009 50

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 4 – Transfort Technical Report 4. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION 4.1. Public Involvement Process In an effort to gain current perspectives and needs regarding transit services in Fort Collins, input was gathered from the community at a series of public meetings. Key public outreach activities that have been conducted for the Transit Strategic Plan (TSOP update) study include:

TSOP Update Public Open House Forums in Fort Collins • Public Meeting #1 – July 31, 2008 • Public Meeting #2 – December 17, 2008 • Public Meeting #3 – April 9, 2009

Poudre School District Forums • High School Principle Interviews – June 24, 2008 • Fort Collins High School Open House – August 21, 2008 • Poudre High School Open House – August 27, 2008 • Rocky Mountain High School Open House – September 10, 2008 • Fossil Ridge High School Open House – September 24, 2008

Input was also received by email, phone and postal mail. Information and results from the 2008 Transfort Bus Rider Survey and the Community for Sustainable Energy (CFORSE) surveys were referenced to acknowledge other information contributed from the public, and to compare issues, concerns and recommendations.

Stakeholder Briefings/Interviews Transfort and City staff held over 30 stakeholder meetings to gather input on issues, concerns and benefits related to the current transit services. A list of these meetings can be found in Appendix C.

4.2. Council Briefings and Presentations Project updates were provided to the Fort Collins City Council as follows: • July 11, 2008 status update memo to Council • October 30, 2008 status update memo to Council • Fort Collins City Council Work Session – February 10, 2009 • Fort Collins City Council Work Session – May 12, 2009 • Fort Collins City Council Regular Session – August 18, 2009

August 2009 51

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 4 – Transfort Technical Report 4.3. Summary of Comments and Issues Based on input received and previous studies, public comments for the TSOP update study have been organized by topics, including general feedback, service coverage, service design, bus frequency and hours of operation, and methods to encourage ridership. Comments were also organized by their relationship to local service, Poudre School District and regional service where applicable. Specific public comments received can be found in Appendix D.

4.3.1. General Feedback The current Transfort system seems to generally meet the needs of riders who live along the routes and students who attend public schools, including passengers to/from Colorado State University (CSU). Bus operators were acknowledged as being helpful and professional, and for making efforts to keep an on-time schedule. Feedback regarding each service type is provided below.

Local Service • Route 1 (College Avenue service to CSU campus) is a valuable service. • Downtown and CSU Transit Centers are clean and safe. • The accommodation of bicycles on buses is important and becoming more popular. Provide more capacity for bikes on buses and bike racks at transit facilities. • Many benches and shelters are difficult to access, especially in snow.

Poudre School District • PSD transportation serves the students well, but more efficiency and collaboration between Transfort and PSD is needed. • Transfort routes seem to do a reasonable job serving many schools. • The current collaboration between Transfort and the Poudre School District as part of this planning effort is well recognized.

Regional Service • FoxTrot is a very valuable and needed service. • The regional focus for the study and efforts regarding collaboration between Fort Collins and Loveland transit agencies is supported.

4.3.2. Comments on Service Coverage

Many comments provided by the community state that good transit coverage is provided for most areas within the study area. However, some comments indicate that other areas within Fort Collins and regional areas are in need of expanded transit service. A general suggestion was to provide a maximum half-mile walk distance to a route and

August 2009 52

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 4 – Transfort Technical Report

connect to the perpendicular direction at every major intersection. Specific comments regarding service coverage are listed below.

Local Service Suggested areas of new coverage include:

• The west side of Fort Collins except for areas closest to campus, south Fort Collins area (Shields and Trilby Road; Lemay and Trilby Road), and northern areas (Highway 1, Douglas Road, Anheuser Busch, north Shields Street). • Along primary east-west and north-south streets (Overland, Shields, Laporte, Mulberry, etc.). • Service along Harmony which does not require changing buses to access Front Range Community College (FRCC), and allow people to get between the Mason Corridor and I-25 for car pooling. • Lower income ,(e.g. Bull Run) and senior service housing complexes plus medical facilities (e.g. Center for Orthopedic Rehabilitation and Exercise).

Suggested extensions of current services include:

• Route 17 along Timberline to also serve Horsetooth, Ziegler, and Harmony. Provide service on Harmony to Hewlett Packard gate. • Expand Mason Corridor further north and connect south end of Mason Corridor to old Wal-Mart at Harmony. • Route 8 to Riverside Drive between Lemay and Prospect (high density area).

Poudre School District • Transporting children and youth to/from non-school hour activities, filling a gap in our community where they're supervised and kept safe. • Connections between PSD and charter schools, and between Thompson School District and Poudre Valley School District. • Coordinate school buses and city buses better.

Regional • More regional services connecting Fort Collins and Loveland to Berthoud, Longmont and Greeley. • Transit connections to the Denver metro area and Regional Transportation District (RTD) transit system. • Connections between Fort Collins and Centerra (many Centerra employees come from Fort Collins), including transit services connecting partner hospitals/medical facilities in Loveland and Fort Collins.

August 2009 53

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 4 – Transfort Technical Report 4.3.3. Comments on Service Design There is a high degree of support for route designs based on a grid system. Specifically, comments indicate that grid service should serve most major north/south and east/west arterials such as Shields, Taft Hill, College, Lemay and Timberline. In addition, Mason must interact well with grid system. Other service design comments for the Transfort system include:

• Increase the number of routes that run more continuously along a main thoroughfare, as opposed to routes that cover portions of the roads and then turn off, causing increased transfers and travel time. Provide better timed connections with less wait times between buses. • Large buses could run frequently on a major grid and small buses/vans could "wander" neighborhoods so a person doesn't have to walk a half-mile to catch a bus. • Provide service to “off the grid” spots like the Senior Center during off-peak hours. More advanced services for disabled are needed. • South Transit Center should be near Harmony and College. Move Downtown Transit Center closer to downtown (centralized). • Need routes named for streets (e.g., "The Shields Route," "The Harmony Route," etc.).

4.3.4. Comments on Frequency and Hours of Operation Public input regarding transit services called for more frequency in route schedules, and to provide more service on nights and weekends. Specific comments regarding frequency and hours of operation are listed below.

Local Service • Provide higher frequencies in general on all routes and increase headways during peak hour. Increase frequencies to 10 minutes along enhanced travel corridors. Coordinate schedules with school start times when setting schedules. • Provide service in early evening, late night and on Sundays for select routes. Service is needed during these hours for non-traditional employee schedules, college students, access to medical facilities and church. • Increase hours and frequency with real-time arrival and departure information at stops. Routes 1, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 16, would benefit from higher frequencies.

Poudre School District • Coordinate schedules with school start times. • Increase number of trips on Routes 91 and 92.

Regional Service • Increased frequency (30-minute headways) on FoxTrot. • Provide more trips for regional connections.

August 2009 54

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 4 – Transfort Technical Report 4.3.5. Comments on How to Encourage Ridership Public input suggests that communicating the culture of the service and marketing is important, especially among students at a young age, so the image of using the bus is improved. Input also suggested more low cost fare options and other payment options are needed to encourage ridership. Specific marketing recommendations are summarized below.

• Provide consistent and visually cohesive route names. Incorporate branding (e.g., Hop, Skip, Jump in Boulder), enforce existing policies, provide less complex maps and encourage drivers to help elderly/disabled. • Provide incentives to reward and attract new riders (e.g. Transit validation system to give shoppers a free ride). Create fare free zones. • Educate public about availability of transit and hours of service. Don’t just pitch transit as smarter way to go, but emphasize how transit can serve everyday needs. Perception of transit is critical. • The concept of a regional service partnership and coordination, especially with the school system, has the potential to strongly leverage funding and result in better service to the public.

4.4. Financial Advisory Committee

4.4.1. FAC Purpose A citizen Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) was organized to support the project. It was comprised of representatives from both Fort Collins and Loveland, with the goal of having open discussions about the investment required to implement the future transit strategies that are under development. The committee was charged with undertaking an evaluation of related funding issues, and to identify options to address those issues. The recommendations of the FAC will be included in the overall TSOP update for Fort Collins and Loveland City Council approval.

4.4.2. FAC Representation The FAC was comprised of nine representatives from both Fort Collins and Loveland. Members were not asked to specifically evaluate or comment on the development of transit service concepts. The goal of the FAC was to have open discussion about the necessary financial resources that would enable operational recommendations to be implemented, issues with the candidate funding mechanisms and options to address those issues. To enhance creativity during meetings, individuals who represented agencies or constituencies were not expected to restrict themselves to the prior positions held by their agencies or constituencies.

August 2009 55

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 4 – Transfort Technical Report 4.4.3. FAC Process Financial Advisory Committee meetings were held from September 2008 through March 2009 on a bi-weekly basis. The meetings were facilitated and attended by City staff and members of the project team. During these meetings, committee members discussed issues regarding operating agreements, operations planning scenarios, and funding mechanisms. City staff and project team representatives provided study updates, best practice information and financing methods as support during the process. The Committee finalized recommendations on a funding package on April 28, 2009. An update to the City Council of FAC findings and recommendations was held on May 12, 2009.

August 2009 56

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report 5. PROPOSED PHASED SERVICE CONCEPTS

Proposed service concepts were developed using the process and resources described in Chapters 1 through 3. The TSOP update presents a framework for implementation of future transit improvements in three phases, which are described in detail in this chapter. Proposed changes to Poudre School District Transportation eligibility are also discussed later in this chapter. However, it should be noted that the summary of benefits related to PSD in each phase reflects the proposed expansion of the PSD high school walk boundaries from 2.0 to 2.5-miles. All phases aim to achieve the defined project goals described in Chapter 1. A summary of the ways in which each phase satisfies these goals is provided in Table 9.

August 2009 57

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 9. Summary of How Phases 1, 2, and 3 Satisfy Project Goals Goal Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Aims to improve productivity Aims to improve productivity and performance through and performance through the the development of a transition of route complete grid system in configurations into a grid Fort Collins. The grid system in Fort Collins. The Aims to improve system was recommended transition was recommended productivity through the under the 2002 TSOP as a under the 2002 TSOP as a Goal #1: Develop and expanded transit reconfiguration and/or way to increase the way to increase the system focused on productivity and elimination of routes. effectiveness of Transfort. effectiveness of Transfort. performance to serve the Fort Collins Decisions about route Also, this phase Also, this phase recommends area that meets Fort Collins City Plan reconfigurations/ recommends enhanced enhanced regional service, Policies. eliminations were based regional service, therefore therefore supporting policies on an assessment of the supporting policies 10.4 and 10.4 and 10.5 under Fort existing system. 10.5 under Fort Collins Collins Principle T-10, which Principle T-10, which emphasize the need for emphasize the need for regional transit service, and regional transit service, and for cooperation with regional for cooperation with partners regional partners All phases aim to reduce dependence on travel by personal vehicle by developing a productive and efficient transit system. A more robust transit system encourages use of alternative modes of travel. Goal #2: Meet and exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal for Estimated to reduce CO2 Estimated to reduce CO2 Estimated to reduce CO2 Transportation CO2 reductions by 2020. emissions by 32% (1,579 emissions by 86% (4,179 emissions by 120% (5,845 tons) over the reduction tons) over the reduction tons) over the reduction already realized by existing already realized by existing already realized by existing service. service. service. Goal #3: Provide enhanced mobility for All phases aim to provide enhanced mobility for all ridership markets, including transit- seniors, youth, disabled, and transit dependent riders. Improved connections are provided to locations and facilities that are dependent. critical to these users.

August 2009 58

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Goal Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Goal #4: Develop a public transportation All phases aim to develop a transit system that reduces roadway costs. Increased use of system that reduces roadway related transit services can help reduce automobile traffic and lessen the burden on roadway costs for maintenance, right-of-way infrastructure. acquisition, and construction. Goal #5: Provide funding recommendations to fully implement the Funding and governance recommendations are made to support the buildout of all Transfort Strategic Operating Plan phases (see Chapter 7). update. The extension of Mason This phase also represents Corridor transit into outlying a significant growth in corridors is expected to transit service along other stimulate the local economy The implementation of the enhanced travel corridors, through job creation and as MAX service is expected to which could have the effect a catalyst for new stimulate the local economy of stimulating development/ development. This phase through job creation, and redevelopment. also represents a significant Goal #6: Stimulate the local economy serve as a catalyst for Recommendation for the growth in transit service in through investment in public redevelopment. development of new and Fort Collins, which could transportation infrastructure and improved transit facilities in have the effect of operations. Fort Collins could provide a enhancing personal return on investment. economic opportunity by reducing personal expenses of transit users. It is estimated that every $10 million in capital investment in public transportation yields $30 million in increased business sales (direct, indirect and induced), and that every $10 million in operating investment in public transportation yields $32 million in increased business sales (direct, indirect and induced).

Source: Transfort, DEA, and American Public Transportation Association

August 2009 59

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

5.1. Phase 1 Phase 1 recommends modest transit service growth over existing service. It assumes the implementation of the MAX service and the refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX.

5.1.1. Phase 1 Overview An overview of service improvements recommended for Fort Collins as part of Phase 1 follows:

Local Services • Proposes the relocation of the South Transit Center (STC) to a location off of Fairway Lane • Assumes the implementation of MAX service along the Mason Corridor from the DTC to the proposed new STC • Proposes some new services and realignment of existing routes along Elizabeth, University, Horsetooth and Drake • Recommends the extension of hours on select routes so that early evening service on weekdays and Saturdays is provided • Recommends improved service frequencies on CSU routes and proposes a new numbering system for CSU routes • Includes a new Downtown circulator that would be operated by Transfort, but funded most likely through public-private partnerships.

Poudre School District Services • Includes afternoon service via two dedicated local routes that serve Lincoln Junior High and Poudre High schools • Recommends improved access to Rocky Mountain High School via Shields

Regional Services • Proposes modification of FoxTrot route so that it connects to the proposed new STC in Fort Collins (terminating at the existing North Transfer Center in Loveland)

5.1.2. Near-Term Improvements Several near-term improvements to the Transfort system in Fort Collins were identified as part of this plan and were prioritized for early action. Transfort implemented these near-term improvements as part of their March 2009 service plan changes. Although the changes have already been implemented, they are considered to be part of Phase 1 improvements. The March 2009 improvements are outlined below:

August 2009 60

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

• Route 5 – This route’s northern alignment was modified to provide service to the Wal-Mart located at Lemay and Mulberry. • Route 6 – This route was modified to operate from the CSU Transit Center to the Foothills Mall via Loomis, Mulberry Street, Taft Hill Road, and Horsetooth Road. • Route 8 – This route was modified to operate on Willow Street instead of Jefferson Street providing access to the Aztlan Recreation Center. • Route 17 –This route was modified so that it no longer deviates to Rigden Farms Senior Living Center. • Route 18 – This route was modified so that it no longer deviates to the EPIC Center. • Route 19 – This is a new route implemented to provide service extending from the CSU Transit Center to the Front Range Community College (FRCC) along Shields.

Figure 23 provides a map of the existing Transfort system as of March 2009 (after service changes were implemented).

August 2009 61

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 23. Existing Transfort System (as of March 2009)

Source: Transfort

August 2009 62

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report 5.1.3. Phase 1 Service Plan Phase 1 service improvements in Fort Collins are largely related to the coordination of transit service with the proposed Mason Express (MAX) project. Phase 1 also recommends the restructuring of some CSU-related services to improve productivity and effectiveness. A new numbering system is proposed for all CSU routes starting with 21. Minimal improvements to regional services in Fort Collins are recommended under Phase 1. The existing FoxTrot would remain. Two other regional services would serve Loveland: the existing Route 34-Xpress (34X), a service provided by the NFRMPO would remain in service and a new Route 57 is proposed to provide connectivity to Longmont. A numbering scheme using the 50s series, refers to regional services. See the Loveland-COLT Transit Plan update document for more details on the 34X and Route 57. Partnering strategies would likely be considered for implementation of regional services. Figure 24 provides a map of Phase 1 improvements for Fort Collins.

Phase 1 assumes some changes to existing transit facilities. The existing Downtown Transit Center (DTC), CSU Transit Center, and Harmony Transfer Center would remain in their current locations. The South Transit Center (STC) would be relocated to a new location off of Fairway Lane (see Figure 24).

A description all routes in the Phase 1 service plan is provided below. Table 10 provides a summary of service characteristics for Phase 1. The tables found in Appendix E provide detailed information on operating statistics for Phase 1.

Local Routes • MAX Route – BRT service would provide service along the Mason Corridor from the DTC to the proposed new STC. • Route 1 – This route would be eliminated and replaced with the MAX service. • Route 2 – This route would be modified so that it provides service from the CSU Transit Center to residential areas west of CSU using the following configuration. From CSU, buses would travel northeast to Laurel, then east to Mason. Buses would then follow Mason south to University (this section of Mason would be open to general traffic), then travel west on University to Elizabeth. A portion of University that is currently closed to vehicular traffic would be opened to bus traffic only. Buses would travel west on Elizabeth, south on Overland Trail, east on Prospect, and north on Taft Hill, returning to Elizabeth. “Trailer” trips would continue to operate during peak periods on this route to meet demand. This route would be interlined with Route 7 at CSU Transit Center. • Route 3 – This route would be eliminated and replaced with the modified Route 2 and new Route 23. • Route 4 – This route is one of the lowest performing routes in the existing Transfort system. Under Phase 1, it would be eliminated and replaced with the modified Route 6 service. • Route 5 – This route was recently modified as part of the March 2009 service plan changes. Under Phase 1, Route 5 would continue on its current alignment to

August 2009 63

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

provide service between DTC and Foothills Mall via Lemay. This route would be interlined with Route 9 at the DTC. Route 5 would also be interlined with Route 6 at the Foothills Mall to provide a one-seat ride to/from the proposed MAX. • Route 6 – This route was recently modified as part of the March 2009 service plan changes in order to address issues with on-time performance and inadequate frequencies. Under Phase 1, this route would continue on its current alignment using Loomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and Horsetooth to provide service between the CSU Transit Center and Foothills Mall. This route would be interlined with Route 5 at Foothills Mall. • Route 7 – Under Phase 1, this route would be extended south along John F. Kennedy Parkway, Harmony, and Highway 287 to provide service between the CSU Transit Center and the proposed new STC. This route would be interlined with Route 2 at the CSU Transit Center. • Route 8 – This route was recently modified as part of the March 2009 service plan changes. Under Phase 1, this route would continue on its current alignment to provide service from DTC to the area north of DTC. • Route 9 – No changes are proposed to this route. It would continue to provide service from the DTC to the residential areas directly west of the DTC. Drivers have indicated problems with the existing interline between Routes 9 and 14. To address this issue, this route would be interlined with Route 5 at the DTC under Phase 1. • Route 10 – This is a new proposed route that would serve the Rigden Farms Senior Living Center using Drake to Meadowlark Ave, Swallow Rd, and College to Foothills Mall. This route would be interlined with Route 12 at Foothills Mall. • Route 12 – This is a new proposed route that would serve the Poudre Valley Hospital (PVH) Harmony Campus using Ziegler Rd and Horsetooth to Foothills Mall. This route would be interlined with Route 10 at Foothills Mall. • Route 14 – This route would be modified to begin east of I-25 at Carriage Parkway and Brenton Drive. The route would follow Mulberry and Lincoln to 12th where it would turn south to Mulberry, providing service to the Wal-Mart at Lemay and Lincoln. This route would continue to operate on frontage roads along Mulberry. From the Wal-Mart, this route would continue west on Mulberry and north on Matthews to the DTC. • Route 15 – This route would be eliminated and replaced with MAX service. • Route 16 – This route is one of the lowest performing routes in the existing Transfort system. Under Phase 1, it would be modified to operate from the Harmony Road Park and Ride Lot to the FRCC, with a mid-route deviation into the PVH Harmony campus. • Route 17 – This route is one of the lowest performing routes in the existing Transfort system. Route 17 was recently modified as part of the March 2009 service plan changes so that it no longer deviates to Rigden Farms Senior Living Center. Phase 1 also recommends the modification of the southern portion of this route’s alignment so that it serves Fossil Ridge High School and the PVH

August 2009 64

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Harmony Campus with service continuing west to the new STC. This route would be interlined with Route 18 at Midpoint and Sharp Point. • Route 18 – Route 18 was recently modified as part of the March 2009 service plan changes so that it no longer deviates to the EPIC Center. No other changes are proposed to this route under Phase 1. This route would be interlined with Route 17 at Midpoint and Sharp Point. • Route 19 – This is a new route recently implemented as part of the March 2009 service plan changes. It currently operates along Shields with service from the CSU Transit Center to the FRCC. This route would be extended to the STC under Phase 1. • Downtown Circulator Routes – Two downtown circulator route concepts have been developed by the Transit and Mobility Committee of UniverCity connections. These circulators would provide complimentary service to the Phase 1 routes described above. The first circulator route (“short loop”) would provide bi-directional loop service in the area immediately surrounding the DTC. The second circulator route (“long loop”) would provide bi-directional loop service to the same immediate area surrounding the DTC, as well as the New Belgium, Odell, and Fort Collins breweries east of downtown. Each loop would operate during different time spans during the day. Although Transfort would likely operate both loops, they would most likely be funded through public-private partnerships.

CSU Routes • Route 22 – This route is the same as the existing Route 11. Under Phase 1, increased frequencies with continued supplemental tripper service in the peak periods are recommended to add capacity. • Route 23 – This is a proposed new route that would provide service along Prospect and Stuart when CSU is in-session. “Trailer” trips would operate during peak periods on this route to meet demand.

Tripper Routes • Route 91 – This route would continue to provide service from Lincoln Jr. High School to DTC during afternoon peak periods. • Route 92 – This route would continue to provide service from Poudre High School to DTC during afternoon peak periods.

Regional Routes • FoxTrot – The northern terminus of this route would be moved from the Foothills Mall in Fort Collins to the new proposed South Transit Center (STC) in Fort Collins. This provides a connection to MAX service at the STC and would help address current issues with on-time performance between Loveland and Fort Collins.

August 2009 65

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 24. Phase 1 Improvements – Fort Collins

Source: DEA

August 2009 66

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 10. Proposed Service Characteristics for Phase 1 Routes in Fort Collins

Saturday Service Frequency Weekday Service Frequency (minutes) (minutes) Route # Route Pattern Span of Service Early Early Peak Base Late PM Base Late PM PM PM Period Period Period Period Period Period Period MAX Routes MAX Mason Express 6:00 to 12:00 AM 10 10 15 30 15 30 30 Local Routes 2 Elizabeth/Prospect 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 30 60 n/a 5 Lemay/Horsetooth 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 6 Taft Hill/Horsetooth 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 7 Centre 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 30 60 n/a Pkwy/Drake/Stover 8 N. College/Blue 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 30 n/a n/a 30 n/a n/a Spruce/Conifer 9 Vine/LaPorte (counter- 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a clockwise) 10 East Drake 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 12 East Horsetooth 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 14 East Mulberry 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 16 Harmony 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 17 Timberline/Harmony 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 18 Whedbee/Prospect 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 19 Shields 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 30 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a Downtown Circulator: Long Loop* 12:00 PM to 7:00 PM 10 during span of service 10 during span of service

August 2009 67

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Saturday Service Frequency Weekday Service Frequency (minutes) (minutes) Route # Route Pattern Span of Service Early Early Peak Base Late PM Base Late PM PM PM Period Period Period Period Period Period Period Downtown Circulator: Short Loop* 7:00 PM to 12:00 AM 10 during span of service 10 during span of service CSU Routes 2T Route 2 Elizabeth Peak periods only 60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Trippers 22 Rams Village 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 20 30 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 22T Rams Village Trippers Peak periods only 20 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 23 Prospect/Stuart 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 30 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Tripper Routes 91 Lincoln Jr. High School One trip per day n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 92 Poudre High School One trip per day n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Regional Routes Fox-Trot STC to Loveland 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a Source: Connetics Transportation Group *The Downtown Circulator loops would be operated by Transfort, but would be funded by a separate entity and are not part of the TSOP Update Financial Plan Note: Weekday Time Periods: Saturday Time Periods: Peak Periods = 6:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:30 PM Base Period = 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM Base Period = 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM Early PM = 6:30 to 8:30 PM Early PM = 6:30 to 8:30 PM Late PM = 8:30 PM to 12:00 Midnight Late PM = 8:30 PM to 12:00 Midnight

August 2009 68

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

5.1.4. Poudre School District – Phase 1 Components Implementation of the phased TSOP update will provide PSD students with improved coverage and frequencies, which will provide for greater convenience and flexibility for students making home-to-school, school-to-home trips, as well as special trips including travel to CSU and FRCC for advanced and/or specialized classes.

Phase 1 represents modest growth to the existing Transfort services, including the implementation of the MAX route. This phase provides for incrementally better access to PSD high schools, particularly to Rocky Mountain High School. Existing routes 91 and 92 remain as part of Phase 1, with one trip daily from Lincoln Jr. High and Poudre High schools. These are the only routes that are designed to specifically target PSD students. Table 11 provides an overview of Phase 1 routes that serve PSD high schools.

Table 11. Phase 1 Routes that Serve PSD High Schools

Weekday High Route Description Frequency School (minutes) Service between CSU Transit Center and Foothills 6* 60 Mall using Loomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and Horsetooth Poudre High Same as existing; Service between the DTC and School 9 residential areas west of the DTC; Interlined with 60 Route 5 at DTC 92 Afternoon service from Poudre High School One trip Service between CSU Transit Center and Foothills 6* 60 Mall using Loomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and Horsetooth Rocky Service between the CSU Transit Center and the new Mountain 7 proposed STC; Interlined with Route 2 at CSU Transit 30 High School Center Service between the CSU Transit Center and FRCC 19* 30 with continuing service to the STC Service between the new STC and social service Fort Collins 17* agencies at Prospect and Timberline, as well as the 60 High School PVH Harmony Campus Service between the Harmony Road Park and Ride Lot 16 to the FRCC with a mid-route deviation into the PVH 60 Fossil Ridge Harmony Campus High School Service between the new STC and social service 17* agencies at Prospect and Timberline, as well as the 60 PVH Harmony Campus Source: RAE Consultants, Inc. and DEA

*Route was recently modified or added as part of the March 2009 service plan changes.

August 2009 69

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 25 depicts high school attendance boundaries, current (2.0-miles) and proposed expanded (2.5-miles) walk boundaries, known student addresses, Phase 1 routes, and student addresses that are within ½-mile from Phase 1 routes. Table 12 presents statistics related to the number and percent of PSD high school students that would be within ½-mile of a Transfort route in Phase 1. Approximately 57% of all PSD high school students would be within ½-mile of a Phase 1 route (an 8% increase compared to the existing system). Fossil Ridge and Fort Collins High Schools would experience the greatest increase in service coverage under Phase 1 compared to the existing Transfort system (26% and 15% increases respectively). Poudre and Rocky Mountain High Schools would experience more modest increases in service coverage (3% and <1% increases respectively).

Table 12. PSD Students within ½-Mile of Phase 1 Routes

Students within ½-Mile of Phase 1 Route % change PSD High School Percent of Total (compared to Number of Students Students existing) Poudre 754 44% +3% Rocky Mountain 1,160 68% +<1% Fort Collins 886 76% +15% Fossil Ridge 485 40% +26% Total 3,285 57% +8%

Source: DEA

August 2009 70

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 25. PSD/Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Phase 1 Routes

Source: DEA

August 2009 71

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report 5.2. Phase 2 Phase 2 recommends significant expansion of transit service in Fort Collins, as well as expansion of regional connections to Denver. Partnering strategies between participating jurisdictions would likely be considered for implementation of regional services. This phase assumes the continued refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX. Phase 2 introduces a transition to a grid network in Fort Collins and provides greater route coverage, higher service frequencies, and longer span of service.

5.2.1. Phase 2 Overview An overview of service improvements recommended as part of Phase 2 follows:

Local Services • Proposes a new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center in the vicinity of Harmony Road and Timberline Road • Introduces the transition to a grid route configuration • Recommends 15 new or reconfigured grid system routes with improved peak hour service frequencies • Recommends 10 routes with early evening service, two routes with late evening service, and 16 routes with Saturday service • Proposed increases in span of service and service frequencies

Poudre School District Services • Provides greater service coverage for PSD high school students • Proposes increases in service frequency in the vicinity of Fort Collins, Rocky Mountain and Fossil Ridge high schools

Regional Services • Recommends a new regional route connecting Fort Collins, Loveland, and Denver • Proposes improved frequency and late evening service for the regional route connecting Fort Collins and Loveland

5.2.2. Phase 2 Service Plan Phase 2 recommends a restructuring of bus routes to improve productivity and effectiveness, and introduces a new numbering system for routes using the following convention:

• Local routes are assigned a number that is between 1 and 20. North-south routes are assigned odd numbers and east-west routes are assigned even numbers.

August 2009 72

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

• Routes that operate only when CSU is in-session are assigned numbers in the 20s, beginning with Route 21 (this change would be implemented as part of Phase 1). • New regional routes are assigned numbers in the 50s.

An additional regional route with service connecting Fort Collins, Loveland and Denver is recommended under Phase 2. The existing FoxTrot (operated by Transfort) would remain in service under a new number, Route 51. In addition to the regional routes with service to Fort Collins, two additional routes are recommended for regional service to Loveland: Route 56 (to replace the existing Route 34X with service to Greeley) and Route 57 (as described under Phase 1 with service to Longmont). These are described in more detail in the Loveland-COLT Transit Plan update document. Partnering strategies would likely be considered for implementation of regional services. Figure 26 provides a map of Phase 2 improvements for Fort Collins.

Phase 2 assumes a new proposed transit center, the PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center at Harmony and Timberline (see Figure 26).

A description of all routes in the Phase 2 service plan is provided below. Table 13 provides a summary of service characteristics for Phase 2. The tables found in Appendix E provide detailed information on operating statistics for Phase 2.

Local Routes • MAX Route – This route is the same as under Phase 1. MAX BRT service would be provided along the Mason Corridor from the DTC to the proposed new STC. • Route 1 – This route is similar to portions of Route 6 and 9 proposed under Phase 1. It would serve the Taft Hill Corridor from the DTC to the STC with a mid-route stop at FRCC using the existing Route 9 alignment via Vine, Taft Hill, Harmony, and College. • Route 2 – This route would serve the North College Avenue corridor and community service organizations located along Blue Spruce Drive. It has been given an even number indicating east-west orientation because it will eventually extend to Mountain Vista in Phase 3. This route would be interlined with Route 4 at the DTC (weekdays only). • Route 3 – This route would be the same as Route 19 under Phase 1. It would primarily operate along Shields and provide service from the CSU Transit Center to the FRCC, with continuing service to the STC. • Route 4 – This route would be similar to portions of Route 9. It would serve the LaPorte Corridor to Overland Trail from the DTC. It would be interlined with Route 2 at the DTC (weekdays only). • Route 5 – This route would be similar to Route 7 under Phase 1. It would provide service between the DTC, CSU Transit Center and the new STC via Loomis, Swallow Road, Meadowpark Avenue, Centre Avenue and John F. Kennedy. Routes 5 and 7 provide a blended 15-minute frequency between Foothills Mall and STC. Routes 5 and 7 are also interlined.

August 2009 73

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

• Route 6 – This route is the same as Route 14 proposed under Phase 1. It provides service along East Mulberry and Lincoln, including a connection to the Wal-Mart at Lemay and Lincoln. • Route 7 – The route would provide service between the DTC and Foothills Mall and would provide coverage through the residential neighborhoods located between College Avenue and Lemay. This route follows the same alignment as the existing Route 5 between the Foothills Mall and the new STC. Routes 5 and 7 provide a blended 15-minute frequency in this area. Routes 5 and 7 are also interlined. • Route 8 – This route would provide service along Prospect Road, including stops at government agencies and business located along Midpoint Road and Sharp Point Road. Route 8 is interlined with Route 10 at Overland Trail. • Route 9 – This route would provide service between the DTC and STC along Lemay Road, including service to the Wal-Mart at Lemay and Lincoln. It would also provide service along Lemay south of Harmony. • Route 10 – This route would provide service along Drake Road and is interlined with Route 8 at Overland Trail. • Route 11 – This route is similar to Route 17 proposed under Phase 1. It would provide service along Timberline from Midpoint/Sharp Point to the proposed PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. It would also provide service to the STC via Timberline, Trilby, and US 287. • Route 12 – This route would provide service along Horsetooth and Ziegler with service terminating at the proposed PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. • Route 16 – This route is the same as Route 2 proposed under Phase 1. It provides service from the CSU Transit Center to residential areas west of CSU using Laurel, Mason, University, Elizabeth, Overland Trail, Prospect, and Taft Hill. “Trailer” trips would continue to operate during peak periods on this route to meet demand generated by CSU. • Route 18A and 18B – These routes provide service along the Harmony Road corridor from the STC to the proposed PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. Route 18A would continue east along Harmony to the existing Park and Ride Lot. Route 18B would provide service southeast of the PVH Harmony Campus to Fossil Ridge High School. These two routes would provide a blended 30-minute frequency along Harmony. • Downtown Circulator Routes –The first circulator route (“short loop”) would provide bi-directional loop service in the area immediately surrounding the DTC. The second circulator route (“long loop”) would provide bi-directional loop service to the same immediate area surrounding the DTC, as well as the New Belgium, Odell, and Fort Collins breweries east of downtown. Each loop would operate during different time spans during the day.

August 2009 74

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

CSU Routes • Route 21 – This route would operate from the CSU Transit Center to Mulberry when CSU is in-session. The route is interlined with Route 23 at the CSU Transit Center. • Route 22 – This route is the same as the existing Route 11. Under Phases 1 and 2, increased frequencies with continued supplemental tripper service in the peak periods are recommended to add capacity. • Route 23 – This is a proposed new route that would provide service along Prospect and Stuart when CSU is in-session. “Trailer” trips would operate during peak periods on this route to meet demand. This route is interlined with Route 21 at the CSU Transit Center.

Tripper Routes Routes 91 and 92 are eliminated under Phase 2 because of expanded service to Lincoln Jr. High School provided by Route 1 and expanded service to Poudre High School provided by Routes 4 and 21.

Regional Routes • Route 51 – This route would operate on the same alignment as the current FoxTrot between the new STC in Fort Collins to the North Transfer Station in Loveland, but would include improved service frequencies and late evening service. • Route 52 – This is a proposed new regional route that would provide service between Fort Collins and Denver via Loveland. The route would begin at the new STC in Fort Collins and then would stop at the proposed PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center in Fort Collins and the proposed East Transfer Station in Loveland before continuing in downtown Denver.

August 2009 75

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 26. Phase 2 Improvements – Fort Collins

Source: DEA

August 2009 76

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 –Transfort Technical Report

Table 13. Proposed Service Characteristics for Phase 2 Routes in Fort Collins

Saturday Service Frequency Weekday Service Frequency (minutes) (minutes) Route Route Pattern Span of Service Early Early # Peak Base Late PM Base Late PM PM PM Period Period Period Period Period Period Period MAX Routes MAX Mason Express 6:00 to 12:00 AM 10 10 15 30 15 30 30 Local Routes 1 Taft Hill 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 2 North 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 30 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a College/Wilcox/Conifer 3 Shields 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 4 LaPorte 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 30 n/a n/a 45 n/a n/a 5 Loomis/Centre/JF 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 30 60 n/a Kennedy 6 East Mulberry 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 7 Whedbee/Stover/JF 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 30 60 n/a Kennedy 8 Prospect 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 60 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 9 Lemay 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 60 60 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 10 Drake 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 60 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 11 Trilby/Timberline 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a 12 Horsetooth 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 60 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 16 Elizabeth/Prospect 6:00 to 12:00 AM 30 30 30 60 30 60 60 18A Harmony/Park and Ride 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 60 60 60 n/a 60 60 n/a

August 2009 77

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 –Transfort Technical Report

Saturday Service Frequency Weekday Service Frequency (minutes) (minutes) Route Route Pattern Span of Service Early Early # Peak Base Late PM Base Late PM PM PM Period Period Period Period Period Period Period 18B Harmony/Fossil Ridge 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a HS Downtown Circulator: Long Loop* 12:00 PM to 7:00 PM 10 during span of service 10 during span of service Downtown Circulator: Short Loop* 7:00 PM to 12:00 AM 10 during span of service 10 during span of service CSU Routes 16T Route 2 Elizabeth Peak periods only 60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Trippers 21 Mulberry/Laurel 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 22 Rams Village 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 20 30 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 22T Rams Village Trippers Peak periods only 30 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 23 Prospect/Stuart 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Regional Routes 51 STC to Loveland 6:00 to 12:00 AM 30 60 60 60 60 60 60 52 STC-PVH TC-Loveland- Two round trips 2 round n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Denver per day trips Source: Connetics Transportation Group *The Downtown Circulator loops would be operated by Transfort, but would be funded by a separate entity and are not part of the TSOP Update Financial Plan Note: Weekday Time Periods: Saturday Time Periods: Peak Periods = 6:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:30 PM Base Period = 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM Base Period = 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM Early PM = 6:30 to 8:30 PM Early PM = 6:30 to 8:30 PM Late PM = 8:30 PM to 12:00 Midnight Late PM = 8:30 PM to 12:00 Midnight August 2009 78

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

5.2.3. Poudre School District – Phase 2 Components Implementation of the phased TSOP update will provide PSD students with improved coverage and frequencies, which will provide for greater convenience and flexibility for students making home-to-school, school-to-home trips, as well as special trips and travel to CSU and FRCC for advanced and/or specialized classes.

Phase 2 represents more aggressive expansion of transit services, including expanded service coverage, increased service frequencies and a broader span of service. This phase provides for better access to PSD high schools, particularly to Fort Collins High School and to Rocky Mountain and Fossil Ridge High Schools, which would benefit from increased service frequencies on nearby routes. Routes 91 and 92, which provide existing service from Lincoln Jr. High and Poudre High schools, were eliminated from Phase 2 since Routes 4 and 21 provide service to those schools. Table 14 provides an overview of Phase 2 routes that serve PSD high schools.

Table 14. Phase 2 Routes that Serve PSD High Schools

Weekday High School Route Description Frequency (minutes) Service between CSU Transit Center and Foothills 1 Mall using Loomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and 60 Horsetooth (similar to Route 6 under Phase 1) Poudre High Service to the LaPorte Corridor to Overland Trail 4 30 School from the DTC; Interlined with Route 2 at the DTC Service between the CSU Transit Center to 21 Mulberry when CSU is in-session; Interlined with 30 Route 23 at the CSU Transit Center Service between CSU Transit Center and Foothills 1 Mall using Loomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and 60 Horsetooth (similar to Route 6 under Phase 1) Rocky Mountain Service between CSU Transit Center and Foothills High School 3 Mall via Lomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and Horsetooth 30 (same as Route 19 under Phase 1). Service along Drake Road; Interlined with Route 8 10 30 at Overland Trail Fort Collins High Service along Drake Road; Interlined with Route 8 10 30 School at Overland Trail Service between the new STC and social service agencies at Prospect and Timberline, as well as 11 60 the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center (similar to Route 17 under Phase 1)

August 2009 79

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Weekday High School Route Description Frequency (minutes) Service along Horsetooth and Ziegler, terminating 12 30 at the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. Service between the new STC and social service agencies at Prospect and Timberline, as well as 11 60 the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center (similar to Route 17 under Phase 1) Service along Horsetooth and Ziegler, terminating 12 30 at the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. Service along the Harmony Road corridor from the Fossil Ridge High STC to the Harmony Road Park and Ride Lot with School 18A a stop at the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit 60 Center (30-minute blended frequency along Harmony with Route 18B) Service along the Harmony Road corridor from the STC to Fossil Ridge with a stop at the new PVH 18B Harmony Campus Transit Center (30-minute 60 blended frequency along Harmony with Route 18A)

Source: RAE Consultants, Inc. and DEA

Figure 27 illustrates high school attendance boundaries, current (2.0-miles) and expanded (2.5-miles) walk boundaries, Phase 2 routes, and student addresses that are within ½-mile from Phase 2 routes. Table 15 presents statistics related to the number and percent of PSD high school students that would be within ½-mile of a Phase 2 route. Approximately 69% of all PSD high school students would be within ½-mile of a Phase 2 route (a 31% increase compared to the existing system). Fossil Ridge High School would experience the greatest increase in service coverage under Phase 2 compared to the existing system (110% increase). Fort Collins, Rocky Mountain, and Poudre High Schools would also experience large increases in service coverage (27%, 22%, and 11% increases respectively).

August 2009 80

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 15. PSD Students within ½-Mile of Phase 2 Routes

Students within ½-Mile of Phase 1 Route % change PSD High School Percent of Total (compared to Number of Students Students existing) Poudre 807 47% +11% Rocky Mountain 1,401 83% +22% Fort Collins 973 84% +27% Fossil Ridge 807 67% +110% Total 3,988 69% +31%

Source: DEA

August 2009 81

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 27. PSD/Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Phase 2 Routes

Source: DEA

August 2009 82

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report 5.3. Phase 3 Phase 3 recommends additional transit growth in Fort Collins including longer service hours and limited Sunday transit service, as well as expansion of regional service to Denver, Boulder, Berthoud, and Longmont. This phase assumes the implementation of additional MAX services that extend outside of the Mason Corridor and completes the transition to a full grid network in Fort Collins.

5.3.1. Phase 3 Overview An overview of service improvements recommended as part of Phase 3 follows:

Local Services • Proposes two new express routes to operate alongside the original MAX BRT services, and extend outside of the Mason Corridor to minimize transfers for high demand travel patterns and increase service frequencies along Mason Corridor • Proposes extended span of service with 12 routes offering early evening service and four routes offering late evening service • Recommends additional Saturday service on select routes • Recommends Sunday service for seven routes • Includes the complete transition to a grid route configuration • Recommends increased service frequencies

Poudre School District Services • Proposes improved connections and service frequencies to Fort Collins and Fossil Ridge high schools • Recommends additional public transit coverage for PSD high school students including longer service hours and greater opportunity for connections to FRCC and CSU

Regional Services • Proposes a new route providing connections between South Fort Collins, Loveland (Centerra), Longmont, and Boulder with additional Saturday and Sunday service • Recommends reconfiguration of a regional route to provide service between Fort Collins, Loveland, Berthoud, and Longmont • Recommends additional early evening service and late evening service for regional routes

5.3.2. Phase 3 Service Plan Key Phase 3 improvements include an extension of MAX service outside of the Mason Corridor to provide more one-seat (no transfer) rides. Transit geographic coverage is also expanded to include Mountain Vista, and improved service frequencies and limited

August 2009 83

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Sunday service are also included under Phase 3. Phase 3 recommends further expansion of regional service to Fort Collins, including limited Sunday service to Loveland, Berthoud, and Longmont. In addition to those regional routes serving Fort Collins, one additional route would provide regional service to Loveland: Route 56 would provide service to Greeley from the East and north Transfer Stations in Loveland. Partnering strategies would likely be considered for implementation of regional services. Figure 28 provides a map of Phase 3 improvements for Fort Collins.

Phase 3 does not recommend any additional changes to transit facilities that are not already recommended under Phases 1 and 2. As under Phase 1, the existing Downtown Transit Center (DTC), CSU Transit Center, and Harmony Transfer Center would remain in their current locations and the South Transit Center (STC) would be relocated to a new location off of Fairway Lane. As under Phase 2, a new proposed transit center at the PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center is recommended.

A description of all routes in the Phase 3 service plan is provided below. Table 16 provides a summary of service characteristics for Phase 3. The tables found in Appendix E provide detailed information on operating statistics for Phase 3.

MAX Routes • MAX A Route – This route is the same as the MAX route proposed under Phases 1 and 2. BRT service would provide service along the Mason Corridor from the DTC to the proposed new STC. • MAX B Route – This route would start at Elizabeth and Overland Trail and would operate along Elizabeth and University through the CSU campus to Mason Street. This route would then continue north on Mason Street to the DTC. MAX B and C routes would provide a combined 15-minute frequency along Elizabeth. MAX B would be interlined with MAX C at Overland Trail. • MAX C Route – This route would start at Elizabeth and Overland Trail and would operate along Elizabeth and University through the CSU campus to Mason Street. This route would then continue south on Mason Street to the STC. MAX B and C routes would provide a combined 15-minute frequency along Elizabeth. MAX C would be interlined with MAX B at Overland Trail.

Combined, the three MAX routes provide an average 7.5-minute peak and 10-minute mid-day frequency along the Mason Corridor, and provide one-seat rides to destinations along the Mason Corridor (including CSU) from locations along Elizabeth.

Local Routes • Route 1 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would serve the Taft Hill Corridor from the DTC to the STC with a mid-route stop at FRCC using the existing Route 9 alignment via Vine, Taft Hill, Harmony, and College. • Route 2 – This route is similar to the alignment proposed under Phase 2. It is modified to serve the North College Avenue corridor and realigned Vine to the Mountain Vista area.

August 2009 84

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

• Route 3 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would primarily operate along Shields and provide service from the CSU Transit Center to the FRCC, with continuing service to the STC. • Route 4 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would serve the LaPorte Corridor to Overland Trail from the DTC, and would be interlined with Route 2 at the DTC. • Route 5 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would provide service between the DTC, CSU Transit Center and the new STC via Loomis, Swallow Road, Meadowpark Avenue, Centre Avenue and John F. Kennedy. Routes 5 and 7 are interlined and provide a blended 15-minute frequency between Foothills Mall and STC. • Route 6 – This route is the same as proposed under Phases 1 and 2. It would provide service along East Mulberry and Lincoln, including a connection to the Wal-Mart at Lemay and Lincoln. • Route 7 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would provide service between the DTC and Foothills Mall and would provide coverage through the residential neighborhoods located between College Avenue and Lemay. This route follows the same alignment as the existing Route 5 between the Foothills Mall and the new STC. Routes 5 and 7 are interlined and provide a blended 15- minute frequency in this area. • Route 8 – This route alignment is the same as proposed under Phase 2 with frequency improvements recommended. It would provide service along Prospect Road, including stops at government agencies and business located along Midpoint Road and Sharp Point Road. This route is interlined with Route 10 at Overland Trail. • Route 9 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would provide service between the DTC and STC along Lemay Road, including service to the Wal-Mart at Lemay and Lincoln. It would also provide service along Lemay south of Harmony. • Route 10 – This route alignment is the same as proposed under Phase 2 with frequency improvements recommended. It would provide service along Drake Road. This route is interlined with Route 8 at Overland Trail. • Route 11 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would provide service along Timberline from the intersection of Midpoint and Sharp Point Roads to the proposed PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. It would also provide service to the STC via Timberline, Trilby, and US 287. • Route 12 – This route alignment is the same as proposed under Phase 2 with frequency improvements recommended. It would provide service along Horsetooth and Ziegler with service terminating at the proposed PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. • Route 16 – This route is proposed to be eliminated and replaced by MAX Routes B and C. • Route 18A and 18B – These routes are the same as proposed under Phase 2. They would provide service along the Harmony Road corridor from the STC to

August 2009 85

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

the proposed PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. Route 18A would continue east along Harmony to the existing Park and Ride Lot. Route 18B would provide service southeast of the PVH Harmony Campus to Fossil Ridge High School. These two routes would provide a blended 30-minute frequency along Harmony. • Downtown Circulator Routes –The first circulator route (“short loop”) would provide bi-directional loop service in the area immediately surrounding the DTC. The second circulator route (“long loop”) would provide bi-directional loop service to the same immediate area surrounding the DTC, as well as the New Belgium, Odell, and Fort Collins breweries east of downtown. Each loop would operate during different time spans during the day.

CSU Routes • Route 21 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would operate from the CSU Transit Center to Mulberry when CSU is in-session. This route is interlined with Route 23 at the CSU Transit Center. • Route 22 – This route is the same as proposed under Phases 1 and 2. Under all phases, increased frequencies with continued supplemental tripper service in the peak periods are recommended to add capacity. • Route 23 – This route is the same as proposed under Phase 2. It would provide service along Prospect and Stuart when CSU is in-session. “Trailer” trips would operate during peak periods on this route to meet demand. This route is interlined with Route 21 at the CSU Transit Center.

Tripper Routes • As in Phase 2, Routes 91 and 92 are eliminated in Phase 3. Service to Lincoln Jr. High School is provided by Route 1 and expanded service to Poudre High School is provided by Routes 4 and 21.

Regional Routes • Route 51 – This route would be extended to operate south through Loveland and Berthoud, terminating at RTD’s Longmont park-and-Ride. Higher frequencies and late evening service is also proposed. • Route 52 – This is the same route as proposed under Phase 2. It would provide service between Fort Collins and Denver via Loveland. The route would begin at the new STC in Fort Collins and then would stop at the proposed PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center in Fort Collins and the proposed East Transfer Station in Loveland before continuing to downtown Denver. • Route 53 – This is a proposed new route that would start at the PVH Harmony Campus Transfer Center in Fort Collins, stopping in Loveland (Centerra) and Longmont, and terminating in Boulder.

August 2009 86

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 28. Phase 3 Improvements – Fort Collins

Source: DEA

August 2009 87

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 16. Proposed Service Characteristics for Phase 3 Routes in Fort Collins

Weekday Service Frequency Saturday Service (minutes) Frequency (minutes) Sunday Route Service Route Pattern Span of Service Early Late Early Late # Peak Base Base Freq. PM PM PM PM Period Period Period (min.) Period Period Period Period MAX Routes MAX A Mason Express 6:00 to 12:00 AM 10 10 15 30 15 30 30 30 MAX B Elizabeth/DTC Express 6:00 to 12:00 AM 30 30 30 60 30 60 60 60 MAX C Mason Express 6:00 to 12:00 AM 30 30 30 60 30 60 60 n/a Local Routes 1 Taft Hill 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a n/a 2 North 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 30 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a n/a College/Wilcox/Conifer 3 Shields 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 30 60 n/a 60 4 LaPorte 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 30 n/a n/a 45 n/a n/a n/a 5 Loomis/Centre/JF 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 60 60 n/a n/a Kennedy 6 East Mulberry 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a n/a 7 Whedbee/Stover/JF 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 60 60 n/a n/a Kennedy 8 Prospect 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 60 9 Lemay 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 60 60 60 n/a 60 60 n/a n/a 10 Drake 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 60 11 Trilby/Timberline 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a n/a 12 Horsetooth 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 30 30 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 60

August 2009 88

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Weekday Service Frequency Saturday Service (minutes) Frequency (minutes) Sunday Route Service Route Pattern Span of Service Early Late Early Late # Peak Base Base Freq. PM PM PM PM Period Period Period (min.) Period Period Period Period 18A Harmony/Park and Ride 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 60 60 60 n/a 60 60 n/a 60 18B Harmony/Fossil Ridge 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 60 60 n/a n/a 60 n/a n/a n/a HS Downtown Circulator: Long Loop* 12:00 PM to 7:00 PM 10 during span of service 10 during span of service Downtown Circulator: Short Loop* 7:00 PM to 12:00 AM 10 during span of service 10 during span of service CSU Routes 21 Mulberry/Laurel 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 22 Rams Village 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 20 30 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 22T Rams Village Trippers Peak periods only 20 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 23 Prospect/Stuart 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 30 60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Regional Routes 51 Fort 6:00 to 12:00 AM 30 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 Collins/Loveland/Longm ont 52 STC-PVH TC/Loveland/ Two round trips per 2 round n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Denver day trips 53 PVH Two round trips per 2 round n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a TC/Loveland/Longmont/ day trips Boulder

Source: Connetics Transportation Group

*The Downtown Circulator loops would be operated by Transfort, but would be funded by a separate entity and are not part of the TSOP Update Financial Plan

August 2009 89

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Note: Weekday Time Periods: Saturday Time Periods: Peak Periods = 6:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:30 PM Base Period = 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM Base Period = 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM Early PM = 6:30 to 8:30 PM Early PM = 6:30 to 8:30 PM Late PM = 8:30 PM to 12:00 Midnight Late PM = 8:30 PM to 12:00 Midnight Sunday Time Periods: Base Period = 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM

August 2009 90

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

5.3.3. Poudre School District – Phase 3 Components Implementation of the phased TSOP update will provide PSD students with improved coverage and frequencies, which will provide for greater convenience and flexibility for students making home-to-school, school-to-home trips, as well as special trips and travel to CSU and FRCC for advanced and/or specialized classes.

Phase 3 recommends extension of the MAX services to areas outside of the Mason corridor, further geographic expansion of coverage, expanded regional bus service, and new limited Sunday transit service. Table 17 provides an overview of Phase 3 routes that serve PSD high schools.

Table 17. Phase 3 Routes that Serve PSD High Schools

Weekday High School Route Description Frequency (minutes) Service between CSU Transit Center and Foothills 1 Mall using Loomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and 60 Horsetooth (similar to Route 6 under Phase 1) Poudre High Service to the LaPorte Corridor to Overland Trail 4 30 School from the DTC; Interlined with Route 2 at the DTC Service between the CSU Transit Center to Mulberry 21 when CSU is in-session; Interlined with Route 23 at 30 the CSU Transit Center Service between CSU Transit Center and Foothills 1 Mall using Loomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and 60 Horsetooth (similar to Route 6 under Phase 1) Rocky Service between CSU Transit Center and Foothills Mountain 3 Mall via Loomis, Mulberry, Taft Hill, and Horsetooth 30 High School (same as Route 19 under Phase 1). Service along Drake Road; Interlined with Route 8 at 10 30 Overland Trail Service along Drake Road; Interlined with Route 8 at 10 30 Overland Trail Service between the new STC and social service Fort Collins agencies at Prospect and Timberline, as well as the 11 60 High School new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center (similar to Route 17 under Phase 1) Service along Horsetooth and Ziegler, terminating at 12 30 the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center.

August 2009 91

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Weekday High School Route Description Frequency (minutes) Service between the new STC and social service agencies at Prospect and Timberline, as well as the 11 60 new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center (similar to Route 17 under Phase 1) Service along Horsetooth and Ziegler, terminating at 12 30 the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center.

Fossil Ridge Service along the Harmony Road corridor from the High School STC to the Harmony Road Park and Ride Lot with a 18A stop at the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit 60 Center (30-minute blended frequency with Route 18B) Service along the Harmony Road corridor from the STC to Fossil Ridge with a stop at the new PVH 18B 60 Harmony Campus Transit Center (30-minute blended frequency with Route 18A)

Source: RAE Consultants, Inc. and DEA

Figure 29 illustrates high school attendance boundaries, current (2.0-miles) and expanded (2.5-miles) walk boundaries, Phase 3 routes, and student addresses that are within ½-mile from Phase 3 routes. Table 18 presents statistics related to the number and percent of PSD high school students that would be within ½-mile of a Phase 3 route.

Approximately 69% of all PSD high school students would be within ½-mile of a Phase 3 route (a 32% increase compared to the existing system). As with Phase 2, Fossil Ridge High School would experience the greatest increase in service coverage compared to the existing system (110% increase). Fort Collins, Rocky Mountain, and Poudre High Schools would also experience large increases in service coverage (27%, 22%, and 11% increases respectively).

Table 18. PSD Students within ½-Mile of Phase 3 Routes

Students within ½-Mile of Phase 3 Route % change PSD High School Percent of Total (compared to Number of Students Students existing) Poudre 810 47% +11% Rocky Mountain 1,402 83% +22% Fort Collins 978 84% +27% Fossil Ridge 809 67% +110% Total 3,999 69% +32% Source: DEA

August 2009 92

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 29. PSD/Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Phase 3 Routes

Source: DEA

August 2009 93

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report 5.4. Changes to Poudre School District Transportation Eligibility Over 5,500 students currently attend the four PSD high Schools. An estimated 1,800 new students will be attending the four high schools in fall 2009, when 9th graders will be shifted from junior high schools and integrated into the high schools. These students will put additional demands on PSD transportation services. In order to address these increased demands, PSD is considering an expansion of walk boundaries from the current 2.0-mile distance to a 2.5-mile distance. Expanding walk boundaries would reduce the number of students eligible for PSD transportation, thus helping to address increased financial demands for high school transportation. However, these students would have significantly improved access to the Transfort public transit system.

Table 19 summarizes the change in the number of current student addresses that would be outside of the walk boundary if PSD were to expand walk boundaries by one- half-mile. Students outside the walk boundary would still be eligible for PSD bus services (choice students would continue to be ineligible for busing). Rocky Mountain High School would experience that greatest change due to the expansion of its walk boundary (a 45% decrease in the number of students outside of the walk boundary). Fort Collins, Fossil Ridge, and Poudre High Schools would also experience significant decreases in the number of students outside of their walk boundaries (25%, 15%, and 9% decreases respectively). Figure 30 depicts the limits of the potential expanded walk boundaries, as well as student addresses and the area within ½-mile of existing Transfort routes.

Table 20 presents a broader perspective of the estimated number of students that would be eligible for busing for the total population of high school students. This estimate accounts for both the current student addresses and the estimated 1,800 9th graders that will begin attending PSD high schools in 2010. This estimation also assumes that 38% of all students who live outside the walk boundary are choice students.

Table 20 indicates that approximately 700 fewer students would be eligible for busing if the walk boundary is expanded from 2.0-miles to 2.5-miles. The cost savings associated with an expansion of walk boundaries is difficult to quantify; however, some general statements can be made. The average annual cost for each high school student that is eligible for busing is estimated to be $154 per student (assuming that PSD student transportation costs of $35 per bus hour and that there are 11,000 annual bus hours). Consequently, PSD could potentially save approximately $108,000 by not providing transportation to the 700 students who would no longer be eligible for busing under the expanded walk boundary scenario.

August 2009 94

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 19. Change in Number of Current Students Outside of Walk Boundary

Students Outside Students Outside % Change Total of Current (2.0- of Expanded (2.5- between Current High School Student mile) Walk mile) Walk and Expanded Addresses Boundary Boundary Walk # % # % Boundaries Poudre 1,721 1,517 88% 1,381 80% -9% Rocky 1,697 946 56% 516 30% -45% Mountain Fort Collins 1,160 640 55% 482 42% -25% Fossil Ridge 1,210 971 80% 825 68% -15% Total 5,788 4,074 70% 3,204 55% -21% Source: DEA

1 Total Student Addresses are reported for the 2007-2008 school year. These values do not reflect actual school attendance since not all student addresses are known.

Table 20. Summary of Estimated Changes Related to Expansion of Walk Boundaries

Current (2.0-mile) Expanded (2.5-mile) % Change Walk Boundary Walk Boundary between Current High School and Expanded # % # % Walk Boundaries Total Current Students Live within Walk 1,714 30% 2,584 45% 51% Boundary Live Outside Walk 4,074 70% 3,204 55% -21% Boundary Estimated 9th Graders Live within Walk 540 30% 810 45% 50% Boundary Live Outside Walk 1,260 70% 990 55% -21% Boundary Choice Students 2,016 1,596 Estimated Total Students Eligible for 3,318 2,598 -21% Busing* Source: RAE Consultants, Inc. and DEA

*Assumes that 38% of students who live outside the walk boundary are choice students

August 2009 95

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 30. PSD/Transfort Coverage within ½-Mile of Existing Transfort Routes (Expanded Walk Boundaries)

Source: DEA

August 2009 96

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report 5.5. Future Ridership Analysis Travel demand forecasting was undertaken to asses the future transit ridership potential associated with phased improvements. Transfort planning staff used a sketch model approach to evaluate population and household information associated with future year scenarios, and employed elasticity factors that can affect transit mode share. Elasticity factors included the change in service frequency (headway), travel times and transfer times. Table 21 below presents the projected increase in average daily ridership that could result from the implementation of each phase.

Table 21. Summary of Ridership Forecasts

Scenario Estimated Daily Ridership % Increase in Ridership over Existing System Existing System 6,080 NA Phase 1 (three year horizon) 8,050 32% Phase 2 (five year horizon) 11,300 86% Phase 3 (seven year horizon) 13,385 120%

Source: Transfort

5.6. Proposed Transfort Marketing Efforts Transit marketing should ideally involve a broad range of actions to identify current and potential customer needs, and to attract interest from new transit markets through promotion and ridership incentives. These include current ongoing service planning and promotion strategies, setting of fare structures and levels, public information and education, and management of community and customer relations. All these actions involve an iterative cycle of researching customer needs and strategic opportunities, evaluating and reviewing objectives and tactics, then carrying out planning and implementation actions. Transfort has identified four focus areas in which to emphasize improved awareness of the city’s transit system: general public, full-time CSU students, employee-based programs, and bus schedule production and distribution. Transfort will also continue the marketing of the Mason Corridor to build awareness for the service scheduled to begin in 2011. The following strategies could be employed as part of a Transfort marketing plan:

• Ongoing testimonial campaigns. • Continued messaging to CSU students and employers to promote the convenience and financial incentives associated with transit, as well as the benefits of employee-based programs, through direct mail and advertising in print media. • Promotion of monthly and annual passes so that customers, particularly low- income customers, benefit from the “price ladder” in which the cost per ride becomes less expensive as longer-term passes are purchased.

August 2009 97

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

• Continued regular updates, production, and distribution of Transfort’s bus schedules.

Several enhancements or supplemental strategies could be considered in order to complement the above strategies. These are summarized below.

• Broader marketing to largest user groups including full-time CSU and PSD students, local residents, and employers/employees. Marketing techniques that could target these groups include: o Media advertising o Internet marketing o Use of social networking sites (such as Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter) o Establish permanent, high visibility transit information displays at key destinations o Targeted/community based marketing. o Continuing and furthering new partnerships (e.g., CSU, PSD, and FRCC) o Establishing PSD student advocacy representatives. o Partnerships with businesses, as well as tourism and service industries o Educating and training “front-line” business, civic, and employer representatives

• Create a visual brand so that there is consistent messaging across transit vehicles, transit facilities, and marketing materials. Key factors to be considered when implementing a new brand include the following: o Consider the target audiences and ensure that the brand will communicate and be relevant to each of these audiences. o Consider the variety of services and vehicles that are provided. A brand must encompass the diverse range of services and allow for customization. o Balance consistency and local identity. A brand must provide a consistent image while allowing for the unique identities of particular services to be highlighted.

• Provide effective passenger information in a user-friendly format. Recommendations for developing a cohesive passenger information system include the following: o Make the Transfort website the key element of the passenger information program. Key information to include on a website includes route maps, service changes, upcoming service-related events, and current studies. Real-time bus arrival/departure information should also be included. PDA links are another option that could be included. o Revise the bus schedule to increase ease of its use. o Advertise the toll-free telephone access number in all marketing materials.

August 2009 98

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

o Provide additional resources at bus stops including route-specific maps, system map, and bus schedules. o Implement a trip planned program. o Establish a clear and consistent policy for numbering and/or naming bus routes in order to create a consistent approach that clearly communicates the role of each service in the overall Transfort network.

• Maximize exposure in local news media. The implementation of a regular news release calendar could help to increase the amount of media exposure received. Transfort could also work with local news reporters to develop articles about individuals who benefit from using transit. Related media efforts could include: o Testimonial campaigns o Service-specific campaigns o “Family of service” ads that provide key facts about each of the service types in order to communicate the presence of a “Seamless” transit network o CSU service ads o Regional service ads o Joint marketing of services in both Loveland and Fort Collins

• Identify individuals and groups to conduct personal presentations to promote Transfort services. Potential groups for presentation include: o Chamber of Commerce o Civic Clubs o Local neighborhood groups o Social service agencies o Tourist based businesses o Educational Facilities o Hospitals/care facilities o Senior centers o Large apartment complexes o Employee orientation programs

• Work directly with businesses to make transit information readily available. Tactics could include: o Brochure distribution by on-site coordinator or payroll department o Displays at business entrance locations o Education about Transfort as part of employee orientations at large employers.

• Continue to deliver the highest quality, most convenient service possible in order to attract and retain riders.

August 2009 99

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 5 – Transfort Technical Report

This page intentionally left blank.

August 2009 100

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report 6. CAPITAL AND OPERATING REQUIREMENTS

This chapter presents the operating, maintenance and capital requirements and costs associated with the phased transit improvements proposed as part of the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP) update for Fort Collins. A separate report contains respective requirements for proposed transit improvements for the Loveland-COLT system. Costs for regional services in this chapter reflects only services that originate in Fort Collins. Ultimately, cost sharing arrangements for regional services will be made among participating communities. Chapter 7 of this document addresses anticipated revenues versus planned expenses, and identifies potential funding mechanisms that could allow for implementation of the overall plan.

6.1. Existing Operating and Maintenance Requirements The existing Transfort operating statistics provide a baseline from which to compare the service levels associated with future proposed improvements, and to help determine the additional operational and funding needs that would be required. Table 22 provides the daily and annual revenue hours for the existing Transfort services.

Table 22. Existing Transfort 2008 Daily and Annual Revenue Hours

Service Type Day Transfort Transfort Total Fixed Total Dial-A-Ride Local Regional Route Transfort Weekday 242 13 255 NA 255 Daily Rev. Hours Saturday 175 13 188 NA 188 Daily Rev. Hours Sunday 0 0 0 NA 0 Daily Rev. Hours Total Annual 66,600 3,800 70,400 25,000 95,400 Rev. Hours

Source: Transfort

Transfort operates a total of 17 local fixed-routes and one regional route, with 23 vehicles deployed for the fixed-route service during peak weekday operations. Approximately 70,000 annual revenue hours were provided by Transfort in 2008 for the operation of their fixed-route bus services. This includes local routes that are operated all year, plus CSU and PSD school tripper local routes that are operated seasonally. An additional 25,000 revenue hours are associated with the operation of the Transfort Dial- A-Ride services.

Table 23 provides a summary of the annual operating and maintenance (O&M) costs associated with the existing system. These costs represent salaries for drivers and

August 2009 101

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

mechanics, safety training, marketing, fuel and general administration and overhead. The summary also reflects the average operating and maintenance cost per revenue hour of service.

Table 23. Existing Transfort 2008 Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs

Local Fixed Regional Fixed Dial-A-Ride Total Transfort Routes Routes Annual Rev. Hours 66,600 3,800 25,000 95,400 Average O&M Cost $91.99 $91.99 $69.47 NA per Rev. Hour Annual O&M Costs $6,126,550 $349,550 $1,736,750 $8,212,850

Source: Transfort

Total operating costs for Transfort in 2008 were nearly $8.2 million with approximately 75% associated with fixed-route service, 4% with regional fixed-route service and 21% with the Dial-A-Ride services. Average O&M costs for fixed-routed services are $91.99 per revenue hour.

6.2. Phase 1 Operating and Maintenance Requirements Phase 1 recommends modest transit service growth over existing service. It assumes the implementation of the MAX service in Fort Collins and the refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX. It also recommends a Downtown Circulator operating with two variations of bi-directional loop routes throughout the downtown area. Table 24 provides the daily and annual revenue hours for the proposed Phase 1 Transfort services.

Table 24. Phase 1 Transfort Daily and Annual Revenue Hours

Service Type Day Transfort Transfort Total Fixed Total Dial-A-Ride Local Regional Route Transfort Weekday 314 13 326 NA 326 Daily Rev. Hours Saturday 241 13 253 NA 253 Daily Rev. Hours Sunday 0 0 0 NA 0 Daily Rev. Hours Total Annual 89,400 3,800 93,200 25,000 118,200 Rev. Hours

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

Phase 1 services include a total of 18 local fixed-routes and one regional route, with 26 local vehicles and 1 regional vehicle deployed during peak weekday operations. Over

August 2009 102

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

93,000 annual revenue hours would be required by Transfort for the operation of the fixed-route bus services under Phase 1. This is an increase of nearly one third over existing system operations. A constant 25,000 revenue hours are necessary for the operation of the Transfort Dial-A-Ride services.

Table 25 provides a summary of the annual operating and maintenance costs associated with the Phase 1 system. The costs reflect an annual inflation rate of five 5% and assume the target year for Phase 1 implementation is over a three year period. The table also provides a comparison against existing 2008 O&M costs.

Table 25. Phase 1 Transfort Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs

Local Fixed Regional Fixed Dial-A-Ride Total Transfort Routes Routes Annual Rev. Hours 89,400 3,800 25,000 118,200 Average O&M Cost per Rev. $101.66 $101.66 $80.14 NA Hour Annual O&M $9,088,400 $386,300 $2,003,500 $11,478,200 Costs Change from +$2,961,850 +$36,750 +$266,750 +$3,265,350 Existing

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

Notes: 1. Annual O&M costs reflect an annual inflation rate of 5% over three years. Target year for Phase 1 implementation is a three year horizon.

Total Phase 1 operating costs for Transfort would be approximately $11.5 million with almost 80% associated with fixed-route service, 3% with regional service and 17% with the Dial-A-Ride service. Average O&M costs for fixed-routed services are estimated to be $101.66 per revenue hour in a three year horizon. The annual O&M cost increase over existing system operations is nearly $3.3 million.

6.3. Phase 2 Operating and Maintenance Requirements Phase 2 recommends significant expansion of transit service in Fort Collins, as well as expansion of regional connections to Denver and Longmont. This phase assumes the continued refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX. Phase 2 introduces a transition to the grid network in Fort Collins and provides greater route coverage, higher service frequencies, and longer daily span of service. Table 26 provides the daily and annual revenue hours for the proposed Phase 2 Transfort services.

August 2009 103

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 26. Phase 2 Transfort Daily and Annual Revenue Hours

Service Type Transfort Transfort Total Fixed Total Day Dial-A-Ride Local Regional Route Transfort Weekday 477 37 513 NA 513 Daily Rev. Hours Saturday 376 18 394 NA 394 Daily Rev. Hours Sunday 0 0 0 NA 0 Daily Rev. Hours Total Annual 137,300 10,200 147,500 26,000 173,500 Rev. Hours

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

Phase 2 services include a total of 18 local routes and two regional routes, with 38 local vehicles and four regional vehicles deployed during weekday operations. Over 147,000 annual revenue hours would be required by Transfort for the operation of the fixed-route (local and regional) bus services under Phase 2. This is an increase of 110% over the existing system operations. A slight increase to 26,000 revenue hours are necessary for the operation of the Transfort Dial-A-Ride services.

Table 27 provides a summary of the annual operating and maintenance costs associated with the Phase 2 system. The costs reflect an annual inflation rate of 5% and assume the target year for Phase 2 implementation is over a five year horizon. The table also provides a comparison against existing 2008 O&M costs.

Table 27. Phase 2 Transfort Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs

Local Fixed Regional Fixed Dial-A-Ride Total Transfort Routes Routes Annual Rev. 137,300 10,200 26,000 173,500 Hours Average O&M Cost per Rev. $112.08 $112.08 $88.36 NA Hour Annual O&M $15,388,600 $1,143,200 $2,297,350 $18,829,150 Costs Change from +$9,262,050 +$793,650 +$560,600 +$10,616,300 Existing

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team Notes: 1. Annual O&M costs reflect an annual inflation rate of 5% over five years. Target year for Phase 2 implementation is a five year horizon.

August 2009 104

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

Total Phase 2 operating costs for Transfort would be approximately $18.8 million with 82% associated with fixed-route service, 6% for regional service and 12% with the Dial- A-Ride services. Average O&M costs for fixed-routed services are estimated to be $112.08 per revenue hour in a five year horizon. The annual O&M cost increase over existing system operations is approximately $10.6 million.

6.4. Phase 3 Operating and Maintenance Requirements Phase 3 recommends additional transit growth in Fort Collins including longer service hours and limited Sunday transit service, as well as expansion of regional service to Denver, Longmont, and Boulder. This phase assumes the implementation of additional express routes to operate alongside the MAX services, which extend outside of the Mason Corridor. Phase 3 completes the transition to a full grid network in Fort Collins. Table 28 provides the daily and annual revenue hours for the proposed Phase 3 Transfort services.

Phase 3 services include a total of 19 local routes and three regional routes, with 41 local vehicles and 10 regional vehicles deployed during peak weekday operations. Over 189,000 annual revenue hours would be required by Transfort for the operation of the fixed-route bus services under Phase 3. This is an increase of 169% over the existing system operations. A total of 26,000 revenue hours are necessary for the operation of the Transfort Dial-A-Ride services.

Table 28. Phase 3 Transfort Daily and Annual Revenue Hours

Service Type Day Transfort Transfort Total Fixed Total Dial-A-Ride Local Regional Route Transfort Weekday 537 98 635 NA 635 Daily Rev. Hours Saturday 394 54 448 NA 448 Daily Rev. Hours Sunday 99 33 132 NA 132 Daily Rev. Hours Total Annual 159,800 29,600 189,400 26,000 215,400 Rev. Hours

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

Table 29 below provides a summary of the annual operating and maintenance costs associated with the Phase 3 system. The costs reflect an annual inflation rate of 5% and assume the target year for Phase 3 implementation is over a seven year period. The table also provides a comparison against existing 2008 O&M costs.

August 2009 105

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 29. Phase 3 Transfort Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs

Local Fixed Regional Fixed Dial-A-Ride Total Transfort Routes Routes Annual Rev. Hours 159,800 29,600 26,000 215,400 Average O&M Cost $123.56 $123.56 $97.41 NA per Rev. Hour Annual O&M $19,744,900 $3,657,400 $2,532,650 $25,934,900 Costs Change from +$13,618,350 +$3,307,800 +$793,900 +$17,722,100 Existing

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team Notes: 1. Annual O&M costs reflect an annual inflation rate of 5% over seven years. Target year for Phase 3 implementation is a seven year horizon.

Total Phase 3 operating costs for Transfort would be approximately $25.9 million with 76% associated with fixed-route, 14% with regional service and 10% with the Dial-A- Ride services. Average O&M costs for fixed-routed services are estimated to be $123.56 per revenue hour in a seven year horizon. The annual O&M cost increase over existing system operations is approximately 17.7 million.

6.5. Capital Requirements This section describes the capital improvements that would be required to support the phased operational recommendations for TSOP update. This includes both vehicle requirements and facility improvements. Projected needs within each of these categories are summarized in the following sections.

6.5.1. Vehicle Requirements Transfort existing service requires 23 vehicles to operate its fixed-route system during peak weekday service times. An overall fleet of 30 active vehicles currently exists to support fixed-route operations. The mix of vehicle types includes 26 standard 40 ft. transit buses with seated capacities ranging from 37-43 passenger, and 4 mid-sized 35 ft. transit buses with seated capacities of 29-25 passengers. A 60 ft. low floor alternative fuel bus will be used for the Mason Corridor MAX BRT service. Compressed Natural Gas and Bio-Diesel is used for operation of the 30 buses in the existing Transfort Fleet. The proposed phased improvements would require additional vehicles to provide increased service levels.

The proposed phased improvements for the TSOP update will require additional vehicles to provide increased service levels. Table 30 presents a summary of the vehicle requirements that would be necessary for each phase of implementation. A

August 2009 106

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

spare vehicle ratio of 17% has been used to estimate the minimum number of back-up vehicles that should be retained in addition to the peak weekday vehicle operating requirements. The table also presents the change in vehicle requirements over the existing system.

Table 30. Bus Fleet Requirements for the TSOP Update

Existing Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 System

(2008) Number of Local Routes 17 17 17 16 Number of MAX BRT Routes NA 1 1 3 Number of Fort Collins Regional 1 1 2 3 Routes Total Routes 18 19 20 22 Local Services Peak Vehicles 23 21 33 32 Local Service Spare Vehicles 5 4 6 5 MAX BRT/Mason Express Service NA 5 5 9 Peak Vehicles MAX BRT/Mason Express Service NA 1 1 2 Spare Vehicles Fort Collins Regional Service Peak 1 1 4 10 Vehicles Fort Collins Regional Service Spare 1 1 1 2 Vehicles Total Fleet 30 33 50 60 Change from Existing NA 3 20 30 Percent Change over Existing NA 10% 67% 100%

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

A modest fleet expansion would be required for Phase 1, with three additional vehicles necessary to supplement existing operations. A minimum of 33 vehicles would be required. This accounts for six new buses that would be dedicated to the MAX BRT operations. Under Phase 1, the required standard bus requirements for local fixed- routes other than MAX are slightly reduced. This is due to existing routes that are being replaced by MAX.

Phase 2 would require a minimum of 50 vehicles, representing 20 more vehicles than the existing system. As with Phase 1, six buses are dedicated to the Mason MAX service. Increased requirements are necessary for both local and Fort Collins regional services in Phase 2.

August 2009 107

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

In Phase 3, two additional express routes would operate along portions of the Mason Corridor, along with the original MAX BRT service. A total of 11 vehicles would be dedicated to these express and BRT routes. Overall, Phase 3 improvements would require a fleet of 60 buses, which are 30 more than the existing system. Standard transit buses are assumed to be used for the additional express routes under Phase 3.

Cost estimates associated with vehicle acquisition assume both the need for fleet expansion and the replacement of older vehicles due to their useful life. The current estimated cost for a standard 40 ft. transit bus is $400,000, which is assumed for the provision of local and regional services. Alternative bus types such as over-the-road coach buses may be considered for regional services in the future, depending on the specific nature of the travel pattern and regional service characteristics. An annual inflation rate of 5% is applied to future year bus purchase estimates. Buses that would be used for the initial operation of the Mason Corridor MAX BRT service will be procured through the FTA 5309 Small Starts funding program. Estimated bus costs for the expansion of express and MAX services as part of Phase 3 assume the same costs as standard transit buses.

Table 31 presents the costs associated with fleet replacement and expansion requirements for the TSOP update.

As shown in Table 31, replacement vehicles are identified for the existing system and for two future time horizons. New local standard transit vehicles would be necessary for expansion of fixed-route services in Phase 2, and new vehicles to support regional service expansion would be required in both Phases 2 and 3.

Transfort may be able to acquire future funding contributions for up to 80% of vehicle costs through FTA programs such as 5309 Bus Acquisition. If Transfort is successful in securing discretionary federal capital funding, the total local cost of expansion vehicle acquisition could be substantially reduced.

August 2009 108

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 31. TSOP Update Fleet Acquisition Plan

Existing Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 System (three year (five year (seven year (2008) horizon) horizon) horizon) Replacement Vehicles Local Standard Transit Buses 11 17 0 5 Cost for Local Standard Transit Buses $4.4 mill. $7,9 mill. $0 $2.8 mill. Expansion Vehicles Local Standard Transit Buses -3 14 -2 Cost for Local Standard Transit Buses -$1.4 mill. $7.1 mill. -1.1 mill. Max BRT Articulated Buses 6 0 5 Cost for Max BRT Buses FTA Grant NA $2.8 mill. Regional Coach Transit Buses 0 3 7 Cost for Regional Buses NA $1.5 mill. $3.9 mill. Total Vehicle Acquisition Costs $4.4 mill. $6.5 mill. $8.7 mill. $8.4 mill.

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team Notes: 1. Eleven new buses are required for the existing fleet due to vehicle age and useful life. 2. Phase 1 time horizon currently assumes the need for seventeen standard transit buses to be replaced, and the purchase of six new 60 ft. low floor buses for MAX BRT. The number of required local standard transit buses is reduced by three vehicles due to the requirements in Phase 1, and therefore reflected in the overall net cost of new vehicle purchases. 3. Phase 3 time horizon currently assumes the need for five standard transit buses to be replaced. The number of required local standard transit buses is reduced by two vehicles due to the requirements in Phase 3, and therefore reflected in the overall net cost of new vehicle purchases. 4. A 5% annual escalation rate is used for the cost of vehicles in each phase.

6.5.2. Facility Requirements Bus Storage Transfort will construct a new outdoor bus storage canopy in 2010 to support the Mason Corridor MAX BRT Improvements. The estimated fleet size associated with Phase 1 improvements could be accommodated within this facility. However, fleet expansion that would be necessary for Phases 2 and 3 would require additional vehicle storage accommodations, service bays and related equipment.

Several options may be available to house the vehicle fleet when future system expansion occurs. This may include maximizing the use of space at the current site through revised parking configurations. Other consideration may include the expansion of the current facility onto adjacent land, purchase or construction of a new or supplemental facility, leased facility arrangements, or utilization of facilities that are provided through a future contractor to Transfort.

August 2009 109

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 6 – Transfort Technical Report

Bus Stop Shelters and Amenities Service improvements and expansion that involves new route coverage will require the need for new bus stop amenities and shelters. These can cost in the range of $2,000 to $5,000 for a standard stop with a sign, bench and pad. An enhanced stop with a shelter, bicycle parking and some minimal landscaping may cost in the range of $5,000 to $12,500. Major transit stops that support high levels of ridership and may include several unique amenities such as architectural elements, lighting, landscaping and real- time schedule information would require investments over $12,000. Transfort currently has a contract with Next Media that exchanges advertising rights for construction and maintenance of bus shelters. This contract will provide for new bus shelters that are necessary to support the proposed phased service improvements at no additional cost. Therefore, no additional capital expenses for standard bus stops have been reflected in this plan.

Transit Centers and Transfer Stations Each phase of improvements involves some form of transit infrastructure improvement to support the proposed service enhancements. Capital components for each service plan phase are as follows:

Phase 1:

• The full Mason Corridor project is included in this phase. • A new South Transit Center is proposed as part of the MAX project. • A University Avenue transitway is proposed through a short segment of the CSU campus (currently dedicated to pedestrian use). • Modifications to the Transfort maintenance facility may be required to accommodate MAX buses.

Phase 2:

• A new PVH Harmony Campus transit center is proposed in Fort Collins. • Expanded maintenance facilities will be needed due to additional vehicle requirements.

Phase 3:

• Further expansion of maintenance facilities will be needed for Transfort services, if not accommodated in Phase 2 facility expansions.

The magnitude and extent of these improvements will require further definition as the implementation planning is undertaken for each phase. The specific concepts for each element will be dependent on a variety of factors, such as site capacity requirements, land availability, integration with the existing traffic system, funding and partnership opportunities.

August 2009 110

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report 7. IMPLEMENTATION OF SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS

This chapter presents the financial approach for the implementation of proposed service improvements for the TSOP update. Specifically, this section discusses the results of the financial analysis that was undertaken by the project team and the Citizen’s Financial Committee (FAC). BBC Research & Consulting, (BBC) was retained as a subcontractor by David Evans and Associates (DEA) to assist the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) and project team in identifying transit funding options for Transfort and COLT and, in collaboration with the FAC, helped to develop a preferred funding plan. The following sections describe the process undertaken by the project team and the FAC for identifying and evaluating funding alternatives and developing a fair and practical funding model. This chapter considers the funding requirements for implementation of the Fort Collins TSOP, based on the shortfall between current revenues and estimated future expenses.

7.1. Financial Advisory Committee (FAC)

7.1.1. Funding and Evaluation Process The FAC was organized by Transfort and COLT staff and consists of an eight-member panel of Fort Collins and Loveland residents. FAC members represent a broad range of community interests, including business, real estate, university, social services and transit advocacy. The FAC held semi-monthly meetings from September 2008 to April 2009. FAC members were presented with a conceptual framework with which to evaluate and recommend a funding strategy to accompany the service upgrades associated with the TSOP update. Over the course of the 6-month education and deliberation period, the group discussed the benefits and deficits of a wide range of broad and targeted funding mechanisms and fund collection institutional governance structures.

The conceptual framework of the TSOP funding model is the concept that the cost of transit improvements should be borne principally by those that benefit from improved transit service and that beneficiaries should participate in rough proportion to their degree of benefit. Early in the planning process, consultants, FAC members and Transfort staff acknowledged that defining a fair and practical funding plan meant balancing many disparate factors. The following Figure 31 shows a visual representation of the factors that must be in balance to achieve an equitable funding strategy for Transfort.

August 2009 111

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 31. Funding Challenge: Finding Balance

Source: BBC Research & Consulting

Early in the FAC discussions, the above was used to represent the core issues involved in fashioning an appropriate transit funding solution and to demonstrate that the requirement for practicality implied an imperfect balancing of multiple community objectives.

The project team presented several funding mechanisms and supporting institutions (e.g. regional transportation authority, special districts) for FAC evaluation that could be used to generate and collect funds for transit improvement. Following is a list of potential revenue generation tools and administrative institutions that were evaluated by FAC members.

Revenue Mechanism Institutional Structure • General Fund • Metro District • Property Tax • Urban Renewal Authority • Fares • Special Improvement District • Negotiated Agreements • General Improvement District • Impact Fees • Regional Transportation Authority • Vehicle Registration Fees • Local Improvement District • Federal Funding • Intergovernmental Agreement • Advertising • Regional Service Authority • Utility Fee • Dedicated Sales Tax • Visitor Benefit Tax

August 2009 112

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

• Occupational Privilege Fee • Congestion Fee

The revenue generation tools in the above list were evaluated against a series of criteria. Specific evaluation criteria developed by the FAC included:

• revenue stream certainty; • revenue stream growth along with community growth; • placement of funding burden on users; • ability to have funding flexibility across both municipalities; and • likelihood of public acceptance.

Once an appropriate mix of funding mechanisms was identified, administrative institutions were evaluated based on a set of standards that included ease of formation, administrative requirements, public acceptance and legislative authority to impose the selected taxes, assessments and/or fees.

The FAC selected a mix of funding mechanisms that offer a fair apportionment of costs and reliable revenue production. The selected administrative institution has broad revenue raising power, offers broad flexibility for both Fort Collins and Loveland and provides relative ease to accommodate other municipalities or jurisdictions in the future.

7.1.2. Existing Financial Conditions Transfort currently operates as a service provided by the City of Fort Collins with a total operating budget of about $8 million (for 2008). Figure 32 shows current sources of revenue for Transfort.

Figure 32. Current Revenue Sources – Transfort

Source: Transfort

August 2009 113

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Major revenue sources for Transfort include a large general fund transfer (70% of revenue) and revenue from the Federal government (16%). Federal revenues include payments from Medicaid for the provision of paratransit services and ongoing transfers from the Federal Transit Administration. Other Transfort revenue sources include a negotiated agreement with the Associated Students of Colorado State University (ASCSU), farebox revenue, and advertising and other revenues (each contributing 5%). Transfort also receives a small amount of revenue from Larimer County and the City of Loveland for the regional FoxTrot transit services (1%).

All future funding scenarios are based on an assumption that there will be a “maintenance of effort”, where current funding practices, including general fund transfers, negotiated agreements, farebox revenue, federal grants and advertising revenue will continue to be used and grow according to Transfort’s internal projections.

7.1.3. Operation and Maintenance Revenue and Planned Expenses Estimated revenues for Transfort were compared to the estimated operation and maintenance costs of the proposed phased improvements. This established target funding amounts for the overall evaluation process. The comparisons and summary of projected operation and maintenance costs, available revenues and funding shortfalls for each phase of proposed improvements is provided in Tables 32 through 34.

Table 32. Projected Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs and Funding Needs for Phase 1

Service Area Estimated O&M Available Funding Shortfall Revenues Transfort Local $11,091,900 $8,396,300 $2,695,600 Transfort Regional $386,300 $349,850 $36,450 Total $11,478,200 $8,746,150 $2,732,050

Source: Transfort and Project Team

Table 33. Projected Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs and Funding Needs for Phase 2

Service Area Estimated O&M Available Funding Shortfall Revenues Transfort Local $17,597,600 $10,340,600 $7,257,000 Transfort Regional $1,231,600 $599,500 $632,100 Total $18,829,200 $10,940,100 $7,889,100

Source: Transfort and Project Team

August 2009 114

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 34. Projected Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs and Funding Needs for Phase 3

Service Area Estimated O&M Available Funding Shortfall Revenues Transfort Local $22,180,150 $10,922,050 $11,258,100 Transfort Regional $3,754,800 $1,352,500 $2,402,300 Total $25,934,950 $12,274,550 $13,660,400

Source: Transfort and Project Team

The project team estimated an annual operating and maintenance funding expense of about $22.2 million (in inflated dollars) for the build out of Phase 3 Transfort Local services in a seven year horizon. This represents a shortfall of nearly $11.3 million above current funding methods. Additional funding would be required for regional services, which would likely be implemented as part of a partnership and shared funding arrangement. Total O&M costs of $25.9 million would be required for local and regional services with a shortfall of approximately $13.7 million.

7.1.4. Capital Revenue and Planned Expenses Estimated capital costs for vehicle acquisition for Transfort services were also compared to the minimum estimated federal funding sources that would likely be available. This established capital funding targets for the new vehicle requirements. The comparisons and summary of projected capital costs associated with vehicles, potential funding sources and funding shortfalls for each phase of proposed improvements is provided in Tables 35 through 37 below.

Table 35. Capital Funding Needs for Phase 1 Vehicles

Service Area Estimated Capital Potential Funding Funding Shortfall Transfort Local $6,482,550 $550,000 $5,932,550 Transfort Regional $0 $0 $0 Total $6,482,550 $550,000 $5,932,550

Source: Transfort and Project Team

Table 36. Capital Funding Needs for Phase 2 Vehicles

Service Area Estimated Capital Potential Funding Funding Shortfall Transfort Local $7,147,300 $1,100,000 $6,047,300 Transfort Regional $1,531,550 $150,000 $1,381,550 Total $8,678,850 $1,250,000 $7,428,850

Source: Transfort and Project Team

August 2009 115

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Table 37. Capital Funding Needs for Phase 3 Vehicles

Service Area Estimated Capital Potential Funding Funding Shortfall Transfort Local $4,502,400 $1,100,000 $3,402,400 Transfort Regional $3,939,600 $300,000 $3,639,600 Total $8,442,000 $1,400,000 $7,042,000

Source: Transfort and Project Team

The project team estimated capital expenses to meet the full expansion requirements of Phase 3 to be approximately $23.6 million, when adding the cumulative expenses over all three phases. This represents a shortfall of over $20 million above estimated federal funding sources.

7.1.5. Recommended New Operation and Maintenance Funding Mechanisms Beneficiaries of transit improvements are those individuals, property owners or businesses that experience increased business volume, travel convenience, time savings or property value enhancement because of transit improvements and more efficient traffic flow. Improved Transfort service provides transit riders and the community at large with the following benefits:

• A safe and reliable alternative to driving • A method of transportation for those unable to drive • Reduces vehicle miles traveled (VMT) • Improved air quality • Traffic congestion relief • Opportunities to reduce household transportation expenses • Helps to build a strong local economy • Regional connections between residences and employment and entertainment centers • Municipal savings on road maintenance expenses

The project team focused their efforts on candidate funding mechanisms that allocate costs to reflect these benefits. The following funding mechanisms were chosen because they can be employed in a manner that meets the core criteria expressed above, generates a reliable revenue stream and grows with the community. During the selection process, the project team produced revenue projections for each funding mechanism, demonstrating a wide range of tax and fee rates for the FAC to consider different balances of revenue options. Funding mechanism options investigated for consideration are outlined below.

August 2009 116

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Maintenance of Effort Transfort receives municipal general fund revenues, Federal and State support, passenger fares and other revenue to operate transit service. The TSOP update anticipates continuation of that effort and growth in fares commensurate with an increased level of service. Internal Transfort revenue projections for existing revenue sources are included in revenue projections.

Dedicated Sales Tax A dedicated sales tax is an excise tax on retail goods imposed at the point of sale and dedicated to a specific purpose. The FAC evaluated several tax rates and settled on testing a 0.25-cent tax as the appropriate amount for public acceptance. This tax rate is nearly the same as the dedicated open space tax rate (1/4 cent) in Fort Collins and discussions were held about whether an additional sales tax or a rededication of an existing sales tax would be appropriate with an additional increase of 1/10 cent. The group was undecided about which is more appropriate, but agreed that a dedicated sales tax is necessary for the productivity and reliability of the tax. Virtually all residents of Fort Collins benefit from transit in one form or another and a sales tax is borne by most residents. A sales tax increase or rededication will require passage by voters in a general election.

7.1.6. Transit Utility Fee A transit utility fee is an additional fee charged on residential and business utility accounts. Fort Collins operates its own electric utilities and would most likely use these municipal enterprises as a means to collect the fee. There are several methodologies for calculating this fee: (1) a flat fee for every electric account; (2) an excise fee based on the amount of the electricity bill; and (3) a fee based on trip generation factors for different land use types (e.g., residential, office, retail, industrial). Ultimately the FAC recommended an $8.00 flat fee to be assessed on all utility accounts.

7.1.7. New Negotiated Agreements Currently, the ASCSU pays an annual fee of about $520,000 to Transfort in exchange for fare-free service for all full-time registered Colorado State University (CSU) students. The agreement is renegotiated every three years and is based on historic student ridership. Transfort is also actively seeking other partners in a similar arrangement. The revenue projections for negotiated agreements include assumptions that 2-3 new agreements are established for the sale of similar discounted passes.

7.1.8. Special Assessment A special assessment in this context is an annual per household or square foot charge placed on property within a special improvement district. A special assessment may only be levied against parcels of real estate that have been identified as receiving a direct and unique "benefit" from a public project, which in this case could be the new

August 2009 117

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Mason Corridor MAX BRT line. The special assessment rates considered in this analysis are between $200 and $300 per year for residential units and between $0.05 and $0.06 per built square foot per year for commercial property. The annual special assessment rates would decline as more residences and commercial establishments are built as this revenue source is targeted to raise about $1 million at build out. Funds generated by special assessment may only be used for operation of the Mason Corridor.

The funding mechanisms described above are targeted to place the burden of transit funding on the community at large and individual populations that benefit from Transfort services. The FAC concluded that negotiated agreements, continuation of fares and the special assessment target individual transit users and those specially benefited by transit service improvement. The continuance of general fund support, transit utility fee and dedicated sales tax is targeted to the broader community, which also receives benefit from improved transit service. At the end of the evaluation process, the FAC was pleased with the balance of funding they recommended. Recommendations were documented by the FAC in a letter prepared for Fort Collins and Loveland City Councils, City Managers and for the Poudre School District Superintendent on April 4, 2009 and can be seen in Appendix F.

7.1.9. Revenue Modeling After the appropriate revenue generation strategy and administrative institution were selected, the following assumptions were used to model revenues.

• Maintenance of Effort. Internal projections from Transfort were used to model the continuance of general fund support, fare growth, federal support and other current revenue streams. • Dedicated Sales Tax. Current taxable sales data, obtained from the City of Fort Collins, and projected forward with a 2% rate of inflation. A 0.25% dedicated tax rate is applied to future taxable sales. • Transit Utility Fee. Current electric utility revenue data, obtained from the City of Fort Collins electric utility enterprises, are projected forward with a 2% rate of inflation. An $8.00 utility flat fee rate is applied to future revenue. • Negotiated Agreements. A $25 annual pass fee is modeled based on current enrollment of all students at CSU and FRCC Larimer Campus. The current CSU contribution of $520,000 is netted out of the calculation as it is considered a maintenance of effort. The $25 annual pass is also modeled for PSD students, but for only those students ineligible for school district provided bus service. • Special Assessment/Special Improvement District. The special assessment on a special improvement district along the Mason Corridor is modeled based on residential and commercial land use data and growth projections obtained from the Mason Corridor Economic Analysis commissioned by the City of Fort Collins in 2007. Special assessment rates are between $200 and $300 per year for residential units and between $0.05 and $0.06 per built square foot per year for commercial

August 2009 118

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

property and are targeted to recover a portion of Mason Corridor bus rapid transit operations costs.

Figure 33 shows revenue projections based on the revenue generation mechanisms and assumptions described above. The mix of funding is demonstrated to meet the projected revenue shortfalls calculated by Transfort staff by build out of the proposed transit improvements. Table 38 provides a tabular summary of revenue projections compared to the funding required. Some deficit is still shown due to the expected contributions from partners in funding regional services.

Figure 33. Projected Transfort Operation and Maintenance Revenues from FAC- Recommended Funding Mechanisms

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

Table 38. Transfort Operation and Maintenance Revenue Projections – Phase 3 Buildout

Funding Mechanism Phase 3 Seven Year Horizon Maintenance of Effort/Fares $10,922,031 Dedicated Sales Tax (0.25%) $6,189,161 Transit Utility Fee ($8 Flat Fee) $7,115,283 New Negotiated Agreements $500,000 Special Improvement District $1,000,000 Total $25,726,475

August 2009 119

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Funding Mechanism Phase 3 Seven Year Horizon Projected Funding Required $25,934,950 Net Surplus/Deficit -$208,475

Source: Transfort and DEA Project Team

Appendix G provides additional detail on the evaluation of funding methods, exhibits and summary materials from the FAC process.

7.2. Regional Governance for Transit Services The municipalities of Loveland and Fort Collins have the power to impose and collect all revenue generation mechanisms described above, however the FAC recommended a subsequent study regarding the formation of a Regional Service Authority (RSA) to serve in the administration, organization and consolidation of transit operations for Fort Collins and Loveland.

An RSA is a form of government designed to provide specified services on a regional basis, in this case public transportation. In order to form an RSA, a majority of countywide voters must approve the RSA’s formation and stated purpose. Just under 70% of the Larimer County population live in either Fort Collins or Loveland, and are within the geographic service area of Transfort and COLT. The FAC chose the RSA because it felt that it met the evaluation criteria of revenue raising authority, inter- jurisdictional flexibility between Ft. Collins and Loveland, ease of formation and public acceptance. Specifically, the RSA can provide:

• A direct and effective means of achieving transit service objectives; • A consolidating administrative body to leverage Federal and State funds; • A focus on transit service, which helps avoid confusion with other regional transportation infrastructure efforts; • An effective structure, where each member jurisdiction provides its own funding and contracts with the RSA to provide an appropriate level of transit service; and • A framework for additional jurisdictions to join.

The FAC recommended that an RSA dedicated to transit and with no internal funding, be considered as an initial step towards an area-wide transit operation. A major factor in the FAC proposal is that an RSA structure with no internal funding mechanisms will let each member jurisdiction raise its own funds and purchase transportation service from the RSA. For Fort Collins and Loveland, the likely funding mix has been described above, but other jurisdictions will be able to raise funds by any means when they join the RSA.

August 2009 120

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

In addition to the RSA, a special improvement district must be formed around the Mason Corridor, to provide an administrative entity to collect the proposed special assessment. A special improvement district could be formed by either the proposed RSA or the city of Fort Collins, but must be approved by a majority of the property owners within the district. The district’s primary purpose is to assess the costs of public improvements to those who are specially “benefited” by the improvements. “Benefit” in this case is defined as any increase in property value or adaptability of the property to a superior or more profitable use by the addition of the MAX BRT line. Costs are generally assessed on an equitable and rational basis of determining benefit, in this case by built square footage and by residential unit. By law, the benefits of Mason Corridor landowners are required to be at least equal to the cost of the special assessment imposed. The funds generated by the special assessment must be spent within the special improvement district.

7.3. Implementation Timeline The TSOP update has been developed based on a potential implementation horizon of five to seven years. A phased approach for the TSOP has been proposed to serve as a framework for implementation priorities, and to allow for the opportunity to scale new improvements and investments to future available funding sources. The ability to secure new or additional funding sources over the next two years will be critical in achieving full build-out of all three proposed phases.

Phase 1 is primarily aimed at adapting the existing Transfort system to the Mason Corridor MAX BRT implementation in a three year horizon. Annual operating costs are estimated to be just over 30 percent higher than existing services. Other than the new vehicles that are currently programmed for the Mason Corridor MAX service, no new vehicles are needed for service improvements proposed in Phase 1.

Phase 2 represents a much more significant investment in Transfort services, with an approximate doubling of annual revenue hours. The transition to a grid system in Phase 2 requires a more significant restructuring of multiple routes that must be implemented at the same time as one another. Phase 2 is targeted for an implementation in a five year horizon. Fourteen new vehicles are needed for the implementation of proposed Phase 2 services, in addition to the six Mason Corridor MAX vehicles that will be procured with other dedicated funding sources.

Phase three represents the full build-out of the TSOP update for Transfort. Annual service hours are over two and a half times the levels in the existing system. Many of the improvements in Phase 3 are enhancements to the hours and frequency of routes defined in Phase 2, with some degree of enhanced service coverage. Therefore, Phase 3 could be scaled back to include more incremental steps of improvements between Phases 2 and 3 if needed. The target year for Phase 3 implementation in a seven year horizon. Twenty four new vehicles are needed over the existing fleet, in addition to the original six MAX vehicles, to support the implementation of proposed improvements in Phase 3.

August 2009 121

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Successful implementation and meeting the desired timing for phased improvements will require that the funding mechanisms described in the previous sections are in place before the specific target years for implementation. This is necessary to build capital reserves that are needed for the purchase of new vehicles. However, FTA grant funding can potentially be sought to support some of these capital needs. Vehicle procurement may require a time frame of one year or longer irregardless of the specific funding source. The desired vehicle specifications and vendor can also influence the overall procurement time.

Ongoing revenue streams from future revenue sources will then be used to fund annual operating and maintenance costs associated with the daily operation of transit services. Unit costs for operating requirements (e.g. cost per revenue hour) will typically increase on an annual basis. Therefore, the funding requirements identified in the previous sections reflect an annual escalation rate of five percent.

7.4. Other Implementation Considerations The previous 2002 TSOP presented a number of key considerations that require attention as new transit services are considered for implementation. Many of these tasks are routinely addressed when any level of service refinements are undertaken. These common planning steps, operational issues and guidelines for many of these tasks are briefly summarized below.

• Dates for Start of New Service – Implementation target dates should consider the necessary steps for Council approval and public process. In addition, vehicle procurement should be carefully coordinated with scheduled implementation. Summer is often a common season to implement substantial route changes in university communities, which allows drivers to become more familiar with services before school sessions and winter weather begin. • Ridership and Customer Impacts – Changes in ridership trends should be monitored to determine issues with system familiarity and the level of benefit realized from new route configurations. Ridership trends after several months provide the best indication of service change results. • Further Service Revisions – Early service refinements could be necessary if new routes are not operating or performing as desired. Schedule times, safety, peak load and demand points, transfers and complaints should be monitored to determine if early route revisions are necessary. • FTA Grant Funding for Vehicles – The potential to secure grant funding for future vehicle purchases should be identified as soon as possible. The timing for the grant application process and vehicle procurement could effect the desired implementation dates for new service. • Responsibilities of Transfort Staff – New staff responsibilities related to service changes include new marketing and informational materials, hiring of new drivers, schedule conformation and runcutting, and development of new bus stops and signage.

August 2009 122

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report 7.4.1. Fare Change Policy Recommendations for changes in the fare are developed by Transfort staff. In formulating the fare recommendation, Transfort conducts a meeting to receive oral and written comment from the public on whether transit fares shall be increased. At least fourteen days notice is provided of this meeting by publication in the City’s newspaper of record. The notice includes the time and location of the public meeting; a summary of proposed language; specifies the address where written comments can be mailed; and informs the public of alternative formats available to assist in this public process. The meeting would be scheduled at least thirty days prior to any fare increases being implemented.

The City Council reviews the staff recommendation at a public hearing, after which Council may change the fares through an amendment of the City’s fare resolution and hold a public hearing.

When considering changes to the fare, staff and Council will consider the following:

• Inflation rate • Ridership and revenue trends • Local economic trends • Trends in automobile-related costs such as gas • Service changes • Economic impact on customers • Market conditions and opportunities • The City's financial situation • The City's goals and objectives

The list of factors to be evaluated is not meant to be exclusive; other factors may need to be considered from year to year.

7.4.2. Route Change Policy Recommendations for changes to existing routing are developed by Transfort staff. Staff makes a determination whether the changes represent a Small Scale change or a Large Scale change. A Large Scale Change would be determined if over 5 bus stops will be affected because of the change. A Small Scale Change would be determined if one to five bus stops may be affected by the change, and does not include temporary changes that occur due to construction or street closure.

If the route change recommendations are determined to be Large Scale, then Transfort conducts a meeting to receive oral and written comment from the public on whether the route changes shall be implemented. At least fourteen days notice is provided of this meeting by publication in the City’s newspaper of record. The notice includes the time and location of the public meeting; a summary of proposed changes; specifies the

August 2009 123

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

address where written comments can be mailed; and informs the public of alternative formats available to assist in this public process. The meeting would be scheduled at least thirty days prior to the proposed implementation date. Following the meeting, Transfort staff will take all comments into consideration and make changes as necessary. The Public will be made aware of the large-scale changes through advertisement through the local media and the Cities Webpage. New transit maps will be distributed to all areas that sell bus passes, City facilities, on the buses, and to businesses and high-density residential complexes located along all transit routes. Upon implementation of route changes drivers and Transit staff help aid transit riders to navigate the new transit system.

If the route change recommendations are determined to be Small Scale, then the public will be given a chance to comment on the proposed change during the initial advertising period. Transfort will advertise their intention to change the route, at the bus stop to be changed and on the bus route that is affected. Transfort will also give notice of their intention to change the route to any businesses, health facilities, public agency buildings, and residences adjacent of the proposed bus stop change. If there are no comments, Transfort will proceed with the change. If there are comments, Transfort will take them into consideration and make a decision based on all the facts that have been gathered. If a change is to proceed, temporary signage will be placed at the bus stop and bus route to be changed informing transit patrons of the imminent change and where the stop will be moved.

7.5. Monitoring After Implementation This section provides framework considerations for future standardized performance monitoring of Transfort routes and the overall system. An efficient monitoring process can provide significant value for making ongoing service refinements, future operation planning, and can support future budgeting requirements and financial decisions. Samples of performance monitoring programs are also provided from three other transit agencies as examples for future considerations.

7.5.1. Standardized Performance Monitoring Two types of monitoring are recommended to assure the continued effectiveness and efficiency of transit services for Transfort – trend analysis and peer system comparisons. Trend analysis compares current operating data for with historical data to establish trends in service efficiency and effectiveness. Effective trend analysis requires development of a database of operating and ridership statistics, ideally in monthly format to allow analysis of trends within specific operating seasons. Much of this data is already collected and maintained in some form by Transfort. For trend analysis of system-wide performance, the following statistics are recommended:

• Vehicle hours of service operated • Vehicle miles of service operated

August 2009 124

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

• Passenger boardings or unlinked trips • Passenger fares collected to support system costs • Operating expenses • Maintenance road calls • Incidents • Passenger complaints

The following ratios are recommended for ongoing monitoring on an annual or semi- annual basis at a minimum. Monthly monitoring is also recommended to help assess the distinctions between operating seasons. Once the database is established, the current period should be compared to the same period in the prior year. Annual totals for the measures and ratios should be compared with annual totals for the past five years.

• Boardings per vehicle service hour • Boardings per vehicle service mile • Riders per capita • Operating expense per vehicle service hour (compare increases to the Consumer Price Index (CPI)) • Operating expense per vehicle service mile (compare increases to CPI) • Operating expense per passenger (compare increases in costs per passenger to CPI) • Maintenance road calls per vehicle service mile (use to assess reliability of bus fleet) • Incidents per vehicle service mile (use to identify safety concerns, needs for training) • Passenger fares or visitor fee collected/operating expense (use to determine if costs are increasing faster than fares/fees)

Peer system analysis can be conducted on an annual basis using statistics from other sister agencies and the National Transit Database (NTD). Ideally, the peer group should be selected based on some common characteristics such as population of the area, system fleet size, annual vehicle hours or annual vehicle miles of service. This type of analysis can also identify regional or national trends that may be affecting or mirroring a particular performance trend. Individual systems should be managed to maintain or improve their performance relative to the peer group of transit systems. The same measures listed above can be used for peer system analysis. In addition, the following measures related to the vehicle fleet are also recommended (all based on annual statistics):

• Average transit speed (vehicle miles divided by vehicle hours) • Revenue service miles per vehicle in fleet • Spare vehicle ratio (total vehicles divided by peak vehicles needed for service)

August 2009 125

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

The information above is generally consistent with the types of data collected by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to support the NTD. The NTD is the FTA's primary repository for uniform statistics on the transit industry. It includes key financial and operating data that describe public transit system characteristics. Recipients of FTA Urbanized Area Formula Program (§ 5307) and Non-urbanized Area Formula Program (§ 5311) are required by statute to submit information on an annual basis to the NTD. The information is used by the Secretary of Transportation to administer department programs, and also is made available to the public. An internet based reporting system is utilized to facilitate the collection and summary reporting methods as part of this process.

7.5.2. Samples of Industry Practices Performance standards for three representative transit agencies were reviewed to examine other typical procedures for service monitoring. Representative agencies included the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) in Atlanta, Georgia, the Regional Transportation District in Denver, Colorado, and Pierce Transit in Tacoma, Washington. Each agency uses similar monitoring tools, statistics and metrics to document their relative route productivity and performance. The methods employed for making decisions on service adjustments or changes differ somewhat among agencies.

Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) MARTA employs an assessment process to identify routes that are underperforming based on service standards or declining with a notable trend and need further evaluation. Reports are developed three times a year within 30 days of the end of their reporting period. Resulting recommendations for service modifications or eliminations are required to be presented at a public hearing, and must receive Board approval prior to implementation.

MARTA uses four key criteria to determine if a route is deficient or requires closer monitoring. The criteria include:

• Passengers per Revenue Hour • Passengers per Revenue Mile • Cost per Passenger (Operating Subsidy per Trip) • Farebox Recovery (Revenue Percentage to Operating Cost)

These statistics are computed separately for different classes of routes (e.g. local, feeder, semi-express, small vehicle services, etc.) to provide an average and benchmarks for individual route comparisons. A route is determined to be deficient if, for two consecutive performance periods, it measures 50% or less than the system-wide average for three of the four criteria. For example, the following metrics are used to assess performance under each criterion.

• Service Average • Service Benchmark (50% of Service Average)

August 2009 126

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

• A route is then categorized based on the following measures: o “Pass” = Value greater than Service Benchmark o “Watch List” = Value between Service Benchmark and Service Average for one period o “Fail” = Value below Service Benchmark for two consecutive periods

MARTA will then use these results to take action or determine the appropriate disposition for a given route.

Pierce Transit Pierce Transit has employed a method to monitor service performance measures to assure optimal productivity levels for public transportation services. They have established separate performance standards for each type of route being operated (e.g. local, express, demand-responsive, etc.). Measures have been established to determine if a route is operating at an “E” (Exceeds), “S” (Satisfactory), “M” (Marginal) and “U” (Unsatisfactory) level of performance. The following actions are taken based on the level of performance findings:

• E = Consider headway improvements • S = No change • M or U = headway reductions, operation at policy headways, redesign or elimination

Local routes are evaluated based on the number of total passengers carried per vehicle platform hour, total passengers per revenue mile and the percentage of the route operating costs covered by passenger revenues. Local routes are organized into four subcategories and respective performance standards are summarized in Table 39 below.

Table 39. Pierce Transit Performance Standards for Local Routes

Pass. Revenue/ Pass./Hour Pass./Mile Route Cost Trunk Routes Exceeds >35 >4.0 >.25% Satisfactory 25-35 2.1-3.9 18-25% Marginal 20-25 1.7-2.0 14-18% Unsatisfactory <20 <1.7 <14% Urban Routes Exceeds >30 >2.5 >22% Satisfactory 20-30 1.7-2.4 14-22% Marginal 15-20 1.3-1.6 11-14% Unsatisfactory <15 <1.7 <11%

August 2009 127

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Pass. Revenue/ Pass./Hour Pass./Mile Route Cost Suburban Routes Exceeds >30 >2.5 >22% Satisfactory 15-30 1.3-2.5 11 - 22% Marginal 10-15 0.7-1.3 7 - 11% Unsatisfactory <10 <0.7 <7% Transit Center Connectors Exceeds >30 >2.5 >22% Satisfactory 20-30 1.7-2.4 14 - 22% Marginal 15-20 1.3-1.6 11 - 14% Unsatisfactory <15 <1.3 <11%

Source: Pierce Transit

Commuter and regional express routes are evaluated based on the number of total passengers carried per vehicle platform hour, average passengers carried per trip and the percentage of route operating costs that are recovered from passenger revenues. The performance standards for express services are summarized in Table 40.

Thresholds for each service type were developed based on historical performance and expectations that have been established for Pierce County routes, and therefore cannot be applied directly to another agency. However, this serves as an example of how relative metrics are used to developed a grading system for performance measures, and use of those grades for decisions on service changes.

Table 40. Pierce Transit Performance Standards for Express Routes

Pass. Revenue/ Pass./Hour Pass./Trip Route Cost

Regional Express Routes Exceeds >30 >30 >30% Satisfactory 20-30 25-30 25-30% Marginal 15-20 20-25 15-25% Unsatisfactory <15 <20 <15%

Source: Pierce Transit

Regional Transportation District Part of RTD’s mission is to provide cost-effective service throughout the District. Therefore, the term performance is used interchangeably with effectiveness and efficiency. RTD works with the objective of maximizing ridership within a given budget. Subsidy per boarding (effectiveness) is routinely tracked along with boardings per hour (productivity) to evaluate absolute and relative performance (see Figure 34).

August 2009 128

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 34. RTD Effectiveness – Productivity Chart

Lower Same boardings, less subsidy r Better

Same subsidy, Effectiveness more boardings Subsidy Boardingo per

Boardings per Hour or Productivity Higher

Source: Regional Transportation District

RTD has established guidelines that utilize the measures of subsidy per boarding and boardings per hour to identify the least productive services for further disposition. For example, a route will be evaluated for change if it falls within the least productive 10 percent of routes based on either subsidy per boarding and boardings per hour, or if the route falls below 25% for both measures. The route will specifically be evaluated for marketing, service revision or elimination. The calculation of the 10 percent and 25 percent standards are made for each service class (e.g. Urban Local, Suburban Local, Express, Regional, etc.). The calculations are made from annual, un-weighted data, assuming the data have a normal distribution using appropriate formulas for standard deviation and confidence intervals.

RTD uses tables and charts to depict these service standards to help make judgments about performance. Figure 35 uses a shaded box to show the area where Urban Local routes meet or exceed minimum performance requirements. With this type of illustration, RTD can address issues with routes that fall “outside the box”. In addition, the chart uses vertical lines to represent productivity levels that guide target frequency levels during the peak and off-peak periods.

August 2009 129

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

Figure 35. RTD Service Performance 2007

RTD Service Performance 2007 Urban Local Routes

$0

Skip ($2) 153 40 203 ($4) 21

($6) 35 ($8) 46

54 ($10) 49 125 225

($12) Shaded domains contain

Subsidy per Boarding per Subsidy 201 all routes meeting the 10% ($14) max/min standards. 79

($16) Minimum productivity for Minimum productivity for 15 minute frequency 10 minute frequency ($18) 56 51L ($20) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Boardings per Vehicle Hour

Source: Regional Transportation District

RTD’s Service Standards provide a more detailed description of how these measures are applied, and the disposition taken when routes fall into lower or minimum ranges of performance and productivity.

The case studies provide a good range of techniques for grading route performance and categorizing routes based on relative levels of efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Transfort may choose to incorporate some of these specific performance indicators and monitoring systems, or tailor these measures specifically to their current goals and objectives for system performance.

7.6. Future Action Items A set of action items have been developed to guide the key steps for future phased service implementation. These items listed below will include responsibilities among Transfort, the City of Fort Collins and future transit service partners.

• Confirm the feasibility of route changes and new facilities based on physical opportunities and constraints. This includes all street configurations used for new transit routes, the University Avenue transitway on the CSU campus and the new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center. • Develop transit service standards or guidelines for remaining Enhanced Travel Corridors.

August 2009 130

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Chapter 7 – Transfort Technical Report

• Undertake a feasibility study regarding the establishment of a regional transit provider that could provide services for two or more jurisdictions in the North Front Range with a completion date by December 31, 2010 if resources are available. • Identify potential future funding sources that will be sought for plan implementation. • Initiate discussions with potential downtown Fort Collins partners to implement recommended circulator route. • Undertake discussions with the Poudre School District regarding a negotiated agreement for a transit service partnership. • Initiate discussions with potential partner jurisdictions for the implementation of new regional services. • Develop new performance standards and a formalized transit system performance monitoring program. • Initiate federal funding applications for future transit system capital requirements.

August 2009 131

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Appendix A

Related Plans and Studies

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report A.1 RELATED PLANS AND STUDIES

Several key city plans were reviewed and considered in the TSOP update process. Community visions and goals, as expressed in these plans, helped to drive the development of TSOP update Goals and Objectives and inform the development of future transit concepts. Relevant plans are briefly summarized below, and their relationship to the TSOP update process is noted.

The TSOP update process worked to coordinate with several other projects and studies relevant to the Transfort service area. The Mason Corridor BRT project represents a very large transit investment for Transfort and was particularly important in the development of the TSOP update recommendations. Other relevant projects and studies that were considered are also described. These include the North I-25 Draft Environmental Impact Statement, the Downtown River District Study, and concepts for Downtown Circulator routes.

A.1.1 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (2002) The 2002 TSOP analyzed existing services and conditions in the Transfort system, as well as current and future transit needs. This analysis resulted in a four-phased approach that recommended the conversion of the Transfort system to a grid network by 2010. Figure A-1 illustrates the final “build-out” scenario (Scenario 4) from the 2002 TSOP, recommended to be implemented by 2010. The most significant recommendation from the 2002 TSOP was for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on the Mason Street Corridor in Fort Collins (under Scenario 2).

The project team identified elements of the 2002 TSOP that continue to be relevant to Transfort. Most of the characteristics upon which the 2002 TSOP scenarios were developed; specifically, direct, frequent, two-way services are still considered the best approach to meeting the needs of the community. The specific elements from the 2002 TSOP that are incorporated into the 2009 TSOP update effort include the following:

• Implementation of MAX BRT on the Mason Corridor (assumed to be in place under the 2009 TSOP update). • Relocation of the South Transit Center to better serve Mason Corridor service. • Frequent operation in residential areas west of CSU. • New routes to provide more comprehensive coverage. • Establishment of a grid network in Fort Collins, which remains the most effective transit delivery system given geography and transportation needs. • Providing frequent and direct links with minimal transfers between key destinations

Many changes have occurred since the 2002 TSOP that are addressed in the 2009 TSOP update. Unanticipated levels of growth in the southeast and northeast and the construction of new retail destinations which have increased demand. The need and

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

desire to connect regional centers within the Front Range has also increased since 2002. High fuel prices and environmental concerns have also shifted the city’s philosophy on transit. The 2009 TSOP update also emphasizes the need for more direct alignments through Transfort’s core markets, as well as a rebalancing of service frequencies to integrate more early evening and non-CSU service. It addresses the region’s growth areas with new local and express services, and facilitates connections to Mason Corridor to provide effective collector and distributor service to support the investment in MAX BRT service.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Figure A-1. 2002 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan 2010 Transit System (Scenario 4)

Source: Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, 2002

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report A.1.2 City Plan: Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan (1997, updated 2004) The City Plan was developed in order to support the City of Fort Collins vision through the year 2025 and to provide a framework to integrate and coordinate plans and policies. The plan includes several distinct parts: Community Visions and Goals, City Structure Plan, and Principles and Policies.

City Plan: Community Visions and Goals The Community Visions and Goals portion of the City Plan outlines Fort Collin’s values with a series of vision statements. The city visions are defined in more detail by the city goals, which are grouped into land use, transportation, community appearance and design, economy, housing, environment, open lands, and growth management objectives. The community vision that is most relevant to the 2009 TSOP update indicates that “Fort Collins will confront and mitigate the negative impacts of the car on our lives.” The community transportation goals that are most relevant to the TSOP update include the following:

• Our community will develop and sustain a safe, convenient, and efficient transportation system incorporating and integrating many modes of travel including automobiles, bicycles, and transit. • Our community’s growth will be structured in a compact pattern that facilitates pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel. • Our community’s transportation system will be integrated with nearby county, regional, state, and national systems, • Our community will have a comprehensive public transit system.

Fort Collins’ defined visions and goals were considered in the development of transit concepts as part of the TSOP update. The resulting TSOP reflects the city’s values and works towards the goals defined in the Community Visions and Goals portion of the City Plan.

City Plan: City Structure Plan The City Structure Plan portion of the City Plan focuses on defining how the physical form and development pattern of the city should evolve in order to achieve community vision and goals. The City Structure Plan defines several key principles that were used to guide the development of the plan. Those principles relevant to the 2009 TSOP update include the following:

• Interconnected Transit System: An expanded public transit system designed to provide high-frequency transit service along major travel corridors, with feeder transit lines that provide connections from all major districts within the city. • New Activity Centers in Transit-Served Areas: Established community-wide destinations that serve as focal points and centers of activity.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

• Multiple Means of Travel: City will be connected and accessible by all travel modes and new development will be organized into a compact pattern that is conducive to automobile, pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit travel.

Figure A-2 illustrates the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan. Although the plan acknowledges that cars will continue to be the primary means of travel for many purposes, it also emphasizes that transit, bicycling, and walking will become equally viable and attractive. The transit concepts presented as part of the 2009 TSOP update work towards the effort to make alternate modes more viable and attractive.

City Plan: Principles and Policies The City Plan Principles and Polices portion of the City Plan provide over-arching guidance for other policy plans and serve as a framework to integrate and coordinate future planning efforts. The City Principles and Policies are organized into five main sections: community-wide, neighborhoods, districts, corridors, and edges. The principles and policies that are related to Transfort are directly incorporated into the Goals and Objectives of the 2009 TSOP update, are described under Goal #1 in Chapter 1 of this document. Chapter 5 provides a summary of how the TSOP recommended phased improvements address the project Goals and Objectives, and the Fort Collins Principles and Policies.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Figure A-2. City of Fort Collins Structure Plan

Source: City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, 2004

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report A.1.3 Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan (2004) The City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan (TMP) defines the desired long-term transportation system and provides policy direction regarding the implementation of the transportation improvements. The plan includes a commitment to providing a multi- modal transportation network. The Principles and Policies included in the TMP mirror those outlined in the Fort Collins City Plan. Therefore, the discussion of Principles and Policies and how they relate to the project Goals and Objectives are the same as discussed under Fort Collins City Plan: Principles and Policies.

The TMP also outlines additional Principles and Policies related to transportation corridors which are not included in the City Plan Principles and Policies. These Principles and Policies are summarized below, and contributed to the development of TSOP Goals and Objectives.

PRINCIPLE TC – 1: Transportation Corridors will be developed to provide efficient mobility and cost-effective transport of people and goods between the various districts of the City.

Policy TC-1.3 Integrated Transportation Systems. A network of Transportation Corridors will connect to regionally significant facilities in cooperation with neighboring and regional transportation systems, as indicated in adopted regional transportation plans.

Policy TC-1.5 High Frequency Transit Service. High frequency transit service will be implemented on Transportation Corridors as shown in adopted transit plans and encourage on Transportation Corridors with supportive land uses, providing links between activity centers and districts, recognizing target markets within the City.

In addition to calling for multi-modal upgrades to the transportation system, the TMP also emphasizes a need for additional services that connect to other communities in the region such as Loveland, Greeley, Windsor, Wellington, and Timnath. Potential regional corridors specified in the TMP include: US 287, US 85, US 34, SH 14, SH 382, and SH 257. The TSOP considered this emphasis on regional connections in the development of new recommendations for regional routes.

Enhanced Travel Corridors The TMP introduces the concept of an Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC). ETCs provide multi-modal connections between two or more major activity centers and promote safe, convenient and direct travel through specific pedestrian and transit friendly design elements. The TMP identifies the following corridors as ETCs, and emphasizes the need to consider high-frequency transit and to integrate appropriate land use and development patterns on these corridors:

• Harmony Road, from Mason Corridor to I-25

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

• Mason Corridor, from the Downtown Transit Center to ¾-mile south of Harmony Road • College/Conifer Corridor, from College Avenue to Mountain Vista • Timberline Road/Powers Trail, from Harmony to Conifer

These four corridors complete a loop through Fort Collins and connect to activity centers in and around Downtown, CSU, College Avenue, Harmony Road, and Mountain Vista. See Figure A-3 for an illustration of the ETCs.

The four ETCs were considered in determining the route alignments for transit routes in the 2009 TSOP update. The TSOP update recognizes the importance of these corridors, and incorporated them appropriately in the recommended transit network.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Figure A-3. Enhanced Travel Corridors

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report A.1.4 City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan (1981, updated 2007) The Master Street Plan (MSP) is a representation of the city’s long-range vision of its major street network, and is intended to guide the development of the future street system for the City and its Growth Management Area (GMA). See Figure A-4 for the adopted City of Fort Collins MSP. The MSP represents only major arterials and some key collector streets. Any future streets included in the MSP are based on conceptual- level of design and are not fully engineered. Any roads shown outside of the GMA are meant to show regional connections; City of Fort Collins has no plans to fund any improvements outside of the defined GMA. The modeling conducted as part of the MSP assumed an expanded multi-modal transit system. Therefore, the MSP assumes that transit would absorb a certain level of demand.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Figure A-4. City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan

Source: City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan, 2007

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report A.1.5 Fort Collins Climate Action Plan (2008) This plan identifies local actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions caused by human activity in and around Fort Collins. In 2008, City Council renewed its commitment to climate protection by adopting Colorado’s statewide goals to reduce emissions. City Council committed to reducing emissions 20% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 80% below 2005 levels by 2050. The plan offers a list of strategies that will help Fort Collins advance towards these goals, as well as a list of qualitative measures that will help reduce emissions. Strategies that relate to transportation are summarized below:

• Reduce vehicle miles traveled • Implement modern roundabouts • Seek adequate funding to implement transportation plans, with funding for transit as a priority to achieve best practices • Develop partnerships to reduce vehicle travel • Parking management

A.1.6 Mason Corridor Studies Three studies provide information on Mason Corridor and the Mason Express (MAX) Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project: Mason Street Transportation Corridor Master Plan (2000), Mason Corridor Economic Analysis Report (2007), and the Mason Corridor Mason Express Bus Rapid Transit Environmental Assessment (2008).

The Mason Corridor, shown in Figure A-5, is a five-mile north-south byway within the City of Fort Collins which extends from Cherry Street on the north to south of Harmony Road. The corridor is centered along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway property, located just west of College Avenue (US 287) and includes a new bicycle and pedestrian trail as well as BRT. The BRT system is proposed to operate within an exclusive guideway for 3.6-miles and within general traffic for the remaining 1.4-miles. MAX service is expected to begin in 2011, with construction beginning in 2010. Funding for the Mason Corridor project comes from federal and state sources dedicated to transit system improvements. 80% of the total project costs are expected to come from the Federal Transit Administration’s Small Starts program and the remaining 20% will come from the state’s SB-1 Transit program, as well as local contributions by the City of Fort Collins and the Downtown Development Authority.

Mason Street Transportation Corridor Master Plan (2000) This plan outlines the vision for the Mason Corridor, corridor issues and opportunities, and the conceptual plan for the project. A robust public involvement program was also undertaken as part of the Mason Corridor Master Plan in order to understand the perspective of city businesses and residents. The conceptual plan for the project provided preliminary engineering for the alignment, conceptual design of transit centers, stations, and stops, bus technology recommendations, and guidance for design elements. This plan provided the basis for further study of the Mason Corridor as part

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

of supplemental efforts, including the Mason Corridor Economic Analysis Report (2007) and the Mason Corridor MAX BRT EA (2008).

Mason Corridor Economic Analysis Report (2007) This report provides an analysis of the economic and fiscal benefits of the Mason Corridor project to the City of Fort Collins. The study also acknowledges the potential for the project to generate transit oriented development (TOD) opportunities through the redevelopment of underutilized land along the corridor. TOD theoretically reduces the dependence on private vehicles by locating walkable, high-density, and mixed-use areas around transit connections. Seven major findings resulted from this study, outlined below:

• The Mason Corridor will capture an estimated 18% of the forecasted demand for high-density housing between 2006 and 2031 (subject to land availability) • The Mason Street Project provides additional accessibility to the downtown area and enhances the appeal of the area for residential development • The Downtown residential market is expected to grow modestly over the next 15 years building on the success of early high-density developments • The CSU segment of the Mason Corridor is expected to provide TOD opportunities on both university and private land holdings and act as a catalyst for future redevelopment along the corridor. • The City’s potential investment of $4 to $5 million as local match funds could leverage $58 million in Federal transit funding, as well as generate an estimated $6.1 million in property tax revenue and $14.4 million in sales tax revenue over the next 25 years. Additionally, the project construction is estimated to generate $108.3 million in one-time benefit. • The Mason Corridor is expected to provide a positive climate for TOD, which creates a clear nexus between the transit improvements and enhanced development opportunities and higher land values on surrounding sales. This nexus provides a basis to implement a corridor specific financing mechanism, such as a general improvement district (GID), to fund a portion of the transit improvements. However, the City as a whole also benefits from the new improvements and, therefore, should share in a portion of the cost.

Mason Corridor Mason Express (MAX) Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Environmental Assessment (EA) (2008) The Mason Corridor EA was finalized in May 2008. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was confirmed in September 2008. The Mason Corridor EA and FONSI also include the relocation of the existing South Transit Center (STC), which will serve as the southern terminus of MAX. Several stops are also recommended at the following locations:

• Harmony Road • Prospect Road • Troutman Parkway • Elizabeth Street

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

• Horsetooth Road • Laurel Street • Swallow Road • Mulberry Street • Drake Road • Mountain Avenue • Bay Road

A major intent of the 2009 TSOP update is to coordinate future transit service with the proposed MAX BRT in order to maximize its effectiveness and bolster ridership. The Phase 1 TSOP update recommendations in particular address this need to connect local feeder transit services to the MAX BRT project and stations. Phases 2 and 3 continue to address this need to maintain high-frequency local service to provide efficient connections to the MAX service.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Figure A-5. Mason Corridor MAX BRT

Source: Mason Corridor/MAX BRT EA, 2008

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

A.1.7 North I-25 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) The North I-25 DEIS, which was completed in October 2008, addresses multi-modal transportation improvements along I-25 between Denver and the Fort Collins/Wellington area. The DEIS defines two “packages” of alternatives. Funding has not been identified for either of these alternative packages.

Package A, shown in Figure A-6, calls for new general purpose lanes on I-25, commuter rail service along the BNSF to connect North Front Range communities to the proposed North Metro FasTracks corridor, and commuter bus service on US 85. Package A also indicates three proposed commuter rail stations in Fort Collins and two in Loveland. Package B, shown in Figure A-7, calls for buffer-separated tolled express lanes on I-25 and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service to North Front Range communities along I-25 between Denver and Fort Collins. Package B also indicates a proposed BRT station in the vicinity of I-25 and US 34. All transit concepts and facilities presented in the TSOP update could easily be adapted to serve as collector and distributor services to the regional commuter rail, commuter bus and BRT services included in both packages. The Regional Coordination Committee (RCC) and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) are in the process of developing a preferred alternative. The preferred alternative will likely be some combination of packages A and B.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Figure A-6. North I-25 DEIS Package A

Source: North I-25 DEIS

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Figure A-7. North I-25 DEIS Package B

Source: North I-25 DEIS

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report A.1.8 Downtown River District Streetscape Improvement Project and Downtown Circulator Concept The Downtown River District project was a joint effort between the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) and the City of Fort Collins. The goal of the project is to encourage infill development in the Downtown River District area by addressing streetscape enhancements, traffic circulation, parking, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements. This plan acknowledges the need to investigate the feasibility of a circulator transit route.

Additional definition of circulator transit route was provided by the UniverCity Connection Transit and Mobility Task Force. This task force developed the initial circulator route concepts including two separate loops. A “short loop” would provide bi- directional loop service in the area immediately surrounding the DTC. The “long loop” would provide bi-directional loop service to the same immediate area surrounding the DTC, as well as the New Belgium, Odell, and Fort Collins breweries east of downtown. The loops would be operated during different time spans throughout the day and week. Figure A-8 provides an illustration of these routes.

Figure A-8. Proposed Downtown Circulator Routes

Source: Transfort, 2009

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

A.1.9 Other Related Surveys Two additional studies were integrated in the 2009 TSOP update. The Transfort Bus Rider Survey (2008) was conducted in order to obtain origin-destination, trip purpose, fare, transfer, passenger, and other transit ridership information. The survey addressed all fixed-route Transfort bus service, including the FoxTrot route. The On-Board Survey of Youth Fare-Free Riders (2009) was conducted to gain more information on the students who ride under the City of Fort Collin’s Youth Fare program. The Youth Fare program allows youth ages 17 and younger to ride Transfort for free. The Bohemian Foundation provided a grant to subsidize this program. The survey provides information on youth demographics, purpose(s) of trips, frequency and types of use, overall importance of the program, and satisfaction. The results of both surveys were used in the development of TSOP recommendations.

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Appendix B

Existing Transfort System Route Profiles

August 2009

Route 1 – College Route 1 operates south from DTC on College to the South Transit Center, then continues south on College and west on Harmony to Front Range Community College. The route returns north from Harmony via John F. Kennedy to the STC. Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Center Downtown Fort Collins South Transit Center Colorado State University Foothills Mall Front Range Community College

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:18 am‐7:26 pm 6:18 am‐7:26 pm 6:18 am‐7:26 pm 6:18 am‐7:26 pm Frequency (min): 20 60 20 60 Cycle Time (min): 80 80 80 80 Layover Time (min): 10 10 10 10 Route 1 is interlined with Route 15 for a combined cycle time of 100 min with 14 min of layover. Total One‐Way Trips: 75 75 75 75 Daily Rev‐Hours: 46.6 46.6 46.6 46.6 Daily Rev‐Miles: 490 490 490 490 Peak Buses: 4 4 4 4 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 1,071 799 1,028 772

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 23.0 17.1 22.1 16.6 Ranking (10) (7) (8) (5) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 2.2 1.6 2.1 1.6 Ranking (8) (4) (4) (2) Pass./Trip: 14.3 10.6 13.7 10.3 Ranking (7) (3) (4) (1) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 1‐ Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #1‐ College Description of Existing Alignment

From the Downtown Transit Center, Route 1 travels south on College Avenue through downtown Fort Collins (it returns via Magnolia Street, Remington Street, and Olive Street to access the DTC on Mason Street). As the route continues south on College from Magnolia, it passes the eastern edge of CSU, some single family communities and several medium‐ to high‐ density commercial areas that includes Kmart/King Soopers and Foothills Mall. The route deviates into the South Transit Center before continuing south on College Avenue from Horsetooth Road through very dense commercial areas, including Target.

Route 1 turns west on Harmony Road, where it passes multi‐family and single family communities and begins the return trip back to the DTC after looping at Front Range Community College. On its return trip, the route travels north to the STC on John F. Kennedy Parkway, which contains multi‐family, office and retail centers.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 1 is fairly direct along College with some deviations. Foremost of these are from STC south, where a split alignment leaves College served only in the southbound direction between Horsetooth and Harmony. Difficult turns that slow the route include Shields from FRCC and Horsetooth to College.

• Stops – There are no stops on Mason through what is essentially Fort Collin’s central business district. Transfort operators noted that the southbound stop at College & Mulberry is blocked by parked vehicles. It was also suggested that the stop on College (south of Horsetooth) be moved northward to facilitate transfers with Routes 6, 7 and FoxTrot. Another suggested removing the westbound stop at Harmony & Starflower.

• Schedule – The 20‐minute frequencies on this route can make connecting to other routes which operate at 30‐ or 60‐minute headways difficult.

• Route Connections – Route 1 is interlined with Route 15 at the DTC and has timed connections to Routes 5, 14 and 18. Due to schedule variations, transfers to routes 8 and 9 at the DTC are not evenly timed. At STC, the route has partly‐timed connections to Routes 5, 6, 7, 16 and Foxtrot. Additionally, an untimed connection can be made to Route 7 at Drake and College.

• PSD Connections – This route has no direct connections to PSD schools, although Centennial High School is only two blocks east of Route 1 at Laurel Street.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – The layover time of 14‐minutes for the interlined 1/15 is only 14% of the 100‐minute cycle time. This is insufficient given the high ridership and severe congestion along this route. As a primary connection to other routes, schedule delays here impact transfers throughout the system.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 1‐ Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #1‐ College Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Route 1 ridership is not reliant on CSU riders, with weekday ridership when CSU is in session only slightly higher (4%) than when CSU is out of session at four percent.

Route 1 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

1,300 1,200 Weekday 1,100 Saturday 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Adult fares make up the majority of the riders at 37%. CSU students account for only 12% of the passengers on Route 1, which is lower than the system average. Transfers account for about 12% of ridership, greater than Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 1 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 25% 26%

Systemwide

17% 23% 12%

23% 37% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 1‐ Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #1‐ College

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • About 17% of ridership activity occurred at the DTC, and another 18% occurred at the STC. Vehicle loads were about three times greater between DTC and STC than they were south of STC. • After the transit centers, ridership at FRCC was highest for a single location, generating 8% of activity. While all of College had good activity, the northern end from DTC to College & Laurel performed best as a segment, with 20% of ridership. • Too many trips were not counted to give an accurate assessment of time‐of‐day characteristics. In general, afternoon volumes appear greater than morning levels.

Route 1 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

80 Northbound 70 Southbound

60

50

40 Boardings 30

20

10

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM 7 PM Start of Trip

*The first six morning trips and last five afternoon trips were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 1‐ Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #1‐ College

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 1 ‐ Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #1‐ College

Route 1 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Northbound)

200 10 Average Load 180 9 Boardings 160 Alightings 8 140 7 Load

120 6 Alightings

& 100 5 Vehicle 80 4 60 3 Boardings Average 40 2 20 1 0 0

S B B B B B B B B B B B B B B W EB EB EB N NB N NB W N N N N NB NB N N N NB NB N N N N NB N K S K T L ) DTC C O NY L K W R RT N F) A C JF O RD IRD E A TH RE O FR O L B PAR PEC LAKE E M M TMAN & PKWY R TG U S PITKI B AU (N OLIVE Y MAS NDINGS S AL E DRAKE G ST O & A L (D N AR RDWA A L ARVA & U R & IZ Y E & HINSDALE & OU A L ROE L W H R IN & P & R H TR S E & R EL E R & BO & N THI & UND G E & RMO & & & E H E SP G E & G BE OLIV A LARKBUNTIN G K & E T E LE L & H & JF Y MO OO & LE COLLEGE G MASON RMONY F & OLLE E MU N & A PKWY & E C COLLEGELE COL O PKWY COL & H PKW COLLEG COLLEG COLLEG E GT LDS HARMONY FK JFK GE COLLEG COL N E J JFK LE COLLEG COLLEG LEG SHI HARMONY OL EMI COL C R

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 1 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #1‐ College

Route 1 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Southbound)

260 13 240 Average Load 12 220 Boardings 11 200 Alightings 10

180 9 Load

160 8 Alightings

& 140 7 Vehicle 120 6 100 5 80 4 Average Boardings 60 3 40 2 20 1 0 0

B B B B SB B B B B B B B TC S SB S SB S SB SB SB S SB SB SB SB S S SB S SB S S SB S D E L T T A CTR R WB WB WB W WS L A R I G OF) ETH EC NCE OF) N LE DE AP ERRY B LAKE P A O OF) SI PLAZ (S AURE S DRAKE VARD PING REGE (N RGET) T FRCC M LB L & O STUA R P C TA AS NTIN (E & LAPORTEET U & RUTGERS & RDWALK ( M U AS ELIZA PR & OLUMB ENTR HA SWALLOW & A AN E & M & C T HO COLBOARD M & KB HINSDA E TRE OLIVE & & & & S BO T AN Y R CC S & E PITKIN & R E & M & R LLEGE G & THUNDERBIRD & T N LA F K LLEGE G LLEGE MA & LLEGE E O LLE A O COLLEGE ROU U & HARMONY C O C LLE BTW LLEGE CO LLEGE K E LLEGE CO G T Y CO LLEGE O COLLEGE & G SQUAR & & & LLEGE O CO C CO COLLEGE TRO STARFLOWER E O C MB CO LLE E COLLEGE & HARMO ON & G C TH COLLE HARMONY CO LLEGE LLE OLLEGE HARM SHIELDS CO C CO COLLEGE COLLEGE ARMONY H

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 1 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #1‐ College Route 2 – Prospect/Elizabeth Route 2 operates in a clockwise loop from the CSU Transit Center south on Meridian, west on Prospect, north on Overland, and east on Elizabeth to return to the CTC.

Transit Centers Major Destinations CSU Transit Center Colorado State University Ram’s Village

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:22 am‐6:40 pm 6:22 am‐6:40 pm 6:22 am‐6:40 pm 6:22 am‐6:40 pm Frequency (min): 30 30 30 30 Cycle Time (min): 30 30 30 30 Layover Time (min): 5 5 5 5 Total One‐Way Trips: 25 25 25 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 14.55 12.30 12.30 12.30 Daily Rev‐Miles: 184.31 161.88 161.88 161.88 Peak Buses: 2** 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 794 275 375 199

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 55.2 22.3 30.5 16.2 Ranking (3) (2) (2) (6) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 4.3 1.7 2.3 1.2 Ranking (3) (3) (3) (4) Pass./Trip: 27.7 11.0 15.0 8.0 Ranking (2) (2) (1) (5) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session. **Supplemental a.m. peak service is provided when CSU is in session from 7:25 a.m. to 9:40 a.m.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 2 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #2‐ Prospect/Elizabeth Description of Existing Alignment

Route 2 is a clockwise loop that serves the CSU Transit Center and areas west of campus. From the CSU Transit Center, the route travels south on Meridian Avenue and west on Prospect Road serving shopping centers, multi‐family residences and single family homes. The route travels northbound on Overland Trail passing single family homes and east on Elizabeth Street, where it serves mid‐ to high‐density single family, multi‐family and commercial areas.

The route travels north on Shields Street through student housing and a commercial center, and east on Plum Street returning through campus to the CSU Transit Center. Trailer buses are used during morning peak hours (around7:30 to 9:30 a.m.) to alleviate overloading. Route 3 travels a similar pattern in a counterclockwise direction when CSU is in session.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – The alignment is fairly straightforward, though as a one‐way loop it creates out‐of‐direction travel for riders when CSU is out of session. When school is in‐session, Route 3 provides complementary reverse direction service. Routing across the CSU campus (with speed limits of 20 mph) can slow this route.

• Stops – Transfort operator comments suggested moving the stop on Meridian Avenue at Lake Street before the crosswalk to eliminate having to stop before and after the crosswalk.

• Schedule – Trailer buses are used to alleviate overcrowding during morning peak travel periods, which can cause difficulty for some riders who are passed by a full bus or want to understand which bus to board. Transfort operators suggested that Route 2 should only operate when CSU is in session, and Route 3 should be a year round route.

• Route Connections – The route is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 3, 4, 6, and 7 at the CTC, and untimed transfers here to Routes 11 and 15.

• PSD Connections – Route 2 does not serve any PSD junior high or high schools.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – The layover time of 5‐minutes is 17% of the 30‐minute cycle time. Transfort operators noted that more time was needed for this route, with Meridian Avenue traffic and heavy loading slowing the route down.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 2 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #2‐ Prospect/Elizabeth Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership when CSU is in session is more twice the ridership than when school is out. Even when CSU is out of session, this is one of the top‐performing routes in the system.

Route 2 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

1,000 Weekday 900 Saturday 800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 2 are primarily CSU students and staff, who make up 65% of passengers on this route, far more than the average route. Transfers account for only about 3% of ridership, below Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 2 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 12% 10%

13% Systemwide

17% 23%

23% 65% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 2 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #2‐ Prospect/Elizabeth

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • As expected given the nature of this route, almost half of the ridership activity (45%) occurs at the CTC. Vehicle loads indicate riders use Route 2 to travel from campus to Prospect and to campus from Elizabeth. • Of the other stops, Elizabeth & Taft Hill (King Soopers) had the most activity, with 14% of ridership. As a whole, the Elizabeth segment had slightly more activity than the Prospect segment (28% to 24%). • Several morning trips and one trip in the noon hour were not counted. With these included, Route 2 would like have very high ridership through the entire morning period and steady riders through the rest of the day.

Route 2 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

140

120

100

80

60 Boardings

40

20

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM 7 PM Start of Trip

*Portions of four morning trips and one midday trip were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 2 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #2‐ Prospect/Elizabeth

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 2 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #2‐ Prospect/Elizabeth

Route 2 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads

450 18

400 Average Load 16 Boardings 350 Alightings 14 Load

300 12 Alightings 250 10 &

Vehicle

200 8

150 6 Average Boardings 100 4

50 2

0 0 B R B B B B B B EB B EB EB B B R E S WB W W N E EB EB E E EB EB E T WB WB WB W WB WB WB W W O O R E N A T EN KE N LL H G R IN O N C GE O C ND R HILL OO L I ARK CE LA D I HI OOK ZU Y T P & HEELY IELDS T YLINE OOD AR LA FA A M K U AREN S H ERI U K R FUQUA W L ERLAND TIMBER N S S H S B & V & SOOPERS TAFT & TAFT H & VER LLS O & LE & STIT CITY & AT STIT & O E TH & G H N & TRANSIT WHITCOMB E N T & & E T MOBY TRANSIT C & W KING & E H U & H NORT CEDAR T & H BETH B CO T & U S SPECT PECT & CO & SPECT C T A & TH & E S C MERIDIAN O S & SPE PECT & O D IZ E ZA B C O T O S ELIZAB L B I H PR R EC O PROSPECT PR SPE AN ABE E A EL T IZA P ECT PR R O L IZ ELIZABETHIZ E PLUM P P R L L EL OSP S OSPECT PR E E AB PROSPECT O R VE Z PR P O ELIZABETH LI PR PROSPECT E

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 2 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #2‐ Prospect/Elizabeth Route 3 – Elizabeth/Prospect Route 3 operates in a counterclockwise loop from the CSU Transit Center and travels west on Plum and Elizabeth, south on Overland, east on Prospect, north on Shields, east on Pitkin and north on Meridian back to the CTC.

Transit Centers Major Destinations CSU Transit Center Colorado State University Ram’s Village

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:50 am‐6:40 pm n/a n/a n/a Frequency (min): 30 n/a n/a n/a Cycle Time (min): 30 n/a n/a n/a Layover Time (min): 5 n/a n/a n/a Total One‐Way Trips: 25 n/a n/a n/a Daily Rev‐Hours: 11.83 n/a n/a n/a Daily Rev‐Miles: 153.56 n/a n/a n/a Peak Buses: 2** n/a n/a n/a FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 754 n/a n/a n/a

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 63.7 n/a n/a n/a Ranking (2) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 4.9 n/a n/a n/a Ranking (2) Pass./Trip: 26.9 n/a n/a n/a Ranking (3) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session. ** Supplemental pm peak service is provided from 2:15 p.m. to 4:40 p.m.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 3 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #3‐ Elizabeth/Prospect Description of Existing Alignment

Route 3 operates in a counterclockwise loop, the reverse of Route 2, on weekdays when CSU is in session. From the CSU Transit Center, the route travels west on Plum Street and south on City Park Avenue where it serves high‐density student housing and a commercial center, then west on Elizabeth Street, serving multi‐family and single family residences.

From here, Route 3 operates south on Overland Trail and east on Prospect Road through single family, multifamily and commercial areas. The route travels north on Shields Street, east on Pitkin Street and north on Meridian Avenue to return to the CTC. Trailer buses are used during afternoon peak hours (around 2:15 to 4:30 p.m.) to alleviate overloading.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – The alignment is fairly straightforward. Although it is technically a one‐way loop, it is paired with Route 2 to minimize any out‐of‐direction travel for riders. Routing across the CSU campus (with speed limits of 20 mph) can slow this route. A dangerous left turn must be made from Elizabeth to Overland.

• Stops – No stop issues were detected on this route.

• Schedule – Route 3 operates only when CSU is in‐session, leaving riders with only the reverse direction Route 2 the rest of the time. Trailer buses are used to alleviate overcrowding during the afternoon peak travel period, which can cause difficulty for some riders who are passed by a full bus or want to understand which bus to board. Transfort operators identified that this route was easier to keep on schedule than Route 2, and should be year round with Route 2 operating only when CSU is in‐session.

• Route Connections – The route is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 2, 4, 6, and 7 at the CTC, and untimed transfers here to Routes 11 and 15.

• PSD Connections – Route 3 does not serve any PSD junior high or high schools.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Congestion around campus slows this route down, but operators indicate that the layover time of 5‐minutes (17% of the 30‐minute cycle time) is sufficient.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 3 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #3‐ Elizabeth/Prospect Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. January and February saw the highest average daily ridership for this strong‐performing route. Route 3 does not operate when CSU is out of session or on Saturday.

Route 3 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

1,100 1,000 Weekday 900

800 700

600 500

400

300

200 100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 3 are primarily CSU students and staff, who make up 86% of passengers on this route, more than twice the proportion on the average route. Transfers account for only 1% of ridership, far below Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 3 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other 4% Disabled 5% 5%

Systemwide

17% 23%

23% 37% 86%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 3 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #3‐ Elizabeth/Prospect Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • About 41% of boardings and alightings occurred at the CTC. Vehicle loads indicate riders use Route 3 to travel from campus to Elizabeth and to campus from Prospect. • Of the other stops, Elizabeth & Ram Point (9%) and Elizabeth & Taft Hill (7%) had the most activity. As a whole, the Elizabeth segment had twice the activity than the Prospect segment (32% to 16%). • Route 3’s ridership grew throughout the day, with a long flat peak from 1PM through 4PM.

Route 3 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

80

70

60

50

40

Boardings 30

20

10

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM 7 PM Start of Trip

*Portions of two morning trips were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 3 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #3‐ Elizabeth/Prospect

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 3 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #3‐ Elizabeth/Prospect

Route 3 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads

450 18 Average Load 400 16 Boardings 350 Alightings 14 Load 300 12 Alightings 250 10 &

Vehicle

200 8

150 6 Average Boardings 100 4

50 2

0 0 B B B B B B B B B B SB EB B E B EB EB B W WB SB W W W W W W W WB W T EB E EB EB E EB NB E EB ) E S ) F N R LL S O N ND OD T F) CENTER O ARK HI INT ES QUA HILL AP OF O CENTER T PLUM P O R LA LAKE E T I N UTIO P LARCH FU K & ( I ( & T YP UERT & RWO SKYLIN ITUTION E S (W Y I SKYLINE S C KIMBALL C CURRA VER & TAFT D B LUMBINE CITY T & TAFT & N O & RANS O O M' & & & ATHERIDGE IEL RANS T C & H GLENMOO & A & EDA CT NST E IELDS T M PARK ONS H R TH TH DE C NORTHBROOK E O H H H & H C & T E & PECT P C & S S T E & OL OSPECT & & & CSU M CITY & B H ABE G R T STONECRE MERIDIANCSU IZ SPECT P CT ROS LU IZA L & O E P ECT PROS CT & & P IZABE TH ELIZABET E D P P PROSPECT E EL ABET ELIZAB ELIZABETH PR P CT EL ABE Z AN E PITKIN IZ ELIZABETH LI L PROS PROSPEC P L E R PROS PROS O PITKIN E VE PR O

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 3 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #3‐ Elizabeth/Prospect Route 4 – LaPorte/Mulberry Route 4 operates in a counter‐clockwise loop from the CSU Transit Center, north on Loomis, west on LaPorte, south on Taft Hill, and east on Mulberry and Laurel back to CTC. Transit Centers Major Destinations CSU Transit Center Colorado State University City Park

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday 6:15 am‐10:09 am 6:15 am‐10:09 am Hours of Operation: n/a n/a 12:15 pm‐4:09 pm 12:15 pm‐4:09 pm Frequency (min): 30 n/a 30 n/a Cycle Time (min): 30 n/a 30 n/a Layover Time (min): 6 n/a 6 n/a Total One‐Way Trips: 17 n/a 17 n/a Daily Rev‐Hours: 7.80 n/a 7.80 n/a Daily Rev‐Miles: 79.84 n/a 79.84 n/a Peak Buses: 1 n/a 1 n/a FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 138 n/a 42 n/a

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 17.7 n/a 5.4 n/a Ranking (14) (14) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 1.7 n/a 0.5 n/a Ranking (10) (14) Pass./Trip: 6.9 n/a 2.1 n/a Ranking (13) (14) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 4 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #4‐ LaPorte/Mulberry Description of Existing Alignment

Route 4 is a counter‐clockwise loop that serves the CSU Transit Center and residential areas to the northwest. From the CSU Transit Center, Route 4 travels north on Loomis Avenue, west on LaPorte Avenue, south on Taft Hill Road, east on Mulberry Street, south on City Park Avenue, east on Birch Street, south on Shields Street, and east on Laurel Street to return to the CSU Transit Center. Most of the route comprises of single family residences, student housing and the City Park recreational area, with the greatest densities along City Park, Birch and Laurel.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 4 is a fairly direct counter‐clockwise loop that meanders a bit through local neighborhoods as it returns to CTC. As a large one‐way loop, it creates the potential for significant out‐of‐direction travel for its riders. Transfort operators indicated that LaPorte Avenue does not warrant enough demand for service from both Routes 4 and 9. They also indicate the route may be improved by extending to Overland to access Poudre HS and more residential areas.

• Stops – Transfort operators identified the need to paint the curb red in front of the stop at Birch Street and Wagner Drive for safety.

• Schedule –Route 4 operates Monday through Friday year round; however, the route does not run between 10:09 a.m. and 12: 15 p.m. or after 4:09 p.m. due to low ridership. Despite operating at 30‐minute frequencies, the sporadic service span may prevent new ridership to be attracted to the route.

• Route Connections – The route is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 2, 3, 6 and 7 at CTC. Due to schedule variations, it does not always provide a good transfer to Routes 11 or 15. Transfort operators suggested moving the timepoints up two minutes to allow for transfers with Route 15. An additional timed transfer with Route 9 along Laporte would allow better access for Poudre HS students to transfer to CSU without traveling to the DTC.

• PSD Connections – Route 4 does not serve any schools directly, although analysis of riders by fare class indicate that 30% of riders are youth fare, most likely coming from Poudre HS.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Route 4 has no on‐time issues. If anything, it has excess schedule time. The layover time of 6‐minutes is 20% of the 30‐minute cycle time. Additionally, excess time was noted at the Loomis and LaPorte timepoint where the schedule provides 7 minutes, but only needs 4 minutes, leaving great potential to more efficiently use this route’s resources.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 4 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #4‐ LaPorte/Mulberry Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership when CSU is in session is three times greater than when school is out.

Route 4 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

200 Weekday

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 4 are primarily CSU students and staff, who make up almost half of passengers on this route. Additionally, 30% of passengers are youth, which is higher than the system average. Transfers account for about 4% of ridership, below Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 4 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 11% 30% 12% Systemwide

17% 23%

23% 47% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 4 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #4‐ LaPorte/Mulberry Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • About 44% of ridership activity occurs at the CTC, with the remainder spread evenly across the rest of the alignment. • Ridership peaks in the morning and again in the early afternoon, with highest ridership occurring between 7AM and 8AM. This roughly coincides with the school day of most of this route’s riders.

Route 4 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

30

25

20

15 Boardings 10

5

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM Start of Trip

*The first trip of the day was not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 4 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #4‐ LaPorte/Mulberry

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 4 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #4‐ LaPorte/Mulberry

Route 4 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads

80 8

Average Load 70 7 Boardings Alightings 60 6 Load

50 5 Alightings

&

Vehicle

40 4

30 3 Boardings Average 20 2

10 1

0 0

R B B B B B B B R E NB NB NB SB E E EB S EB EB EB EB S E T WB W W W WB WB WB WB F) E R N T N M LE IS S K ILL OK E O M N E U OD C O H T U E C OAK M LD LEY A HILL O RTL PARK C T PL O O E (S FT C BRYAN Y G PL I & W HI HB A & M SHIELDS IN & MYRT LO S cKIN FORNEY T & WAGN & & & FIS TAFT Y Y & CITY & SH ANS AN & & M & & & A AN ANSIT E E & & & PORTE Y RR RR & EL R TR GRANDVIEWE A E E R W T LOOMIS TE & T L RR PARK TE R R E & CSU R O & B BIRCH LAU L CSU MERIDI LOOMIS LAPORTE O O P L MULB ITY BIRCH MERIDI LAPORT LAPORT P P LAPORTE IL UL MULB C LA LA H URE LA T M LAPORTE LA TAF

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 4 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #4‐ LaPorte/Mulberry Route 5 – Lemay Route 5 operates south from the Downtown Transit Center on Riverside and Lemay, then travels west on Horsetooth to the South Transit Center. Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Center Downtown Fort Collins South Transit Center Wal‐Mart VA Clinic Poudre Valley Hospital Woodward Governor Foothills Mall Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:24 am‐7:15 pm 6:24 am‐7:15 pm 6:24 am‐7:15 pm 6:24 am‐7:15 pm Frequency (min): 60 60 60 60 Cycle Time (min): 60 60 60 60 Layover Time (min): 14 14 14 14 Total One‐Way Trips: 25 25 25 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 12.41 12.41 12.41 12.41 Daily Rev‐Miles: 148.07 148.07 148.07 148.07 Peak Buses: 1 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 272 172 271 180

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 21.9 13.9 21.8 14.5 Ranking (11) (9) (9) (7) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 1.8 1.2 1.8 1.2 Ranking (9) (9) (5) (5) Pass./Trip: 10.9 6.9 10.8 7.2 Ranking (9) (7) (7) (6) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 5 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #5‐ Lemay Description of Existing Alignment

From the CSU Transit Center, Route 5 travels southward from the Downtown Transit Center along Riverside Avenue, east on Mulberry Street to the Wal‐Mart Shopping Center and south on Lemay Avenue through commercial, office, multifamily and single family areas, including senior living communities. The route then travels west on Horsetooth Road passing multifamily communities before looping north on Stanford Road and west into Foothills Mall and the South Transit Center.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 5 is a north‐south route that connects the DTC and the STC. The route is fairly direct with a slight deviation on Mulberry and south on Lemay to serve the Wal‐Mart Shopping Center. The route is impacted by railroad crossings on Mulberry and Lemay and tracks parallel to Riverside.

• Stops – The stop at Mulberry and Lemay that serves the Wal‐Mart Shopping Center does not provide good pedestrian access to the shopping center. There are no stops along a one‐mile segment of the route from Riverside & Lincoln to Mulberry & Lemay.

• Schedule – Route 5 operates at consistent 60‐minute service frequencies Monday through Saturday, year‐round. Transfort operators identified the timing with the South Transit Center is insufficient for connections with Route 6 and FoxTrot.

• Route Connections – This route has timed connections with Routes 8, 9, 14 and 18 at the DTC. Due to schedule variations, Route 5 has only limited connectivity to Routes 1 and 15 at the DTC. At STC, the route has timed transfers to Routes 16 and FoxTrot, but is not timed well to meet Routes 1, 6, and 7. An untimed connection to Route 18 occurs at Prospect and Lemay.

• PSD Connections – Route 5 does not provide direct access to any PSD schools.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Railroad crossings can adversely affect timing on Route 5. The layover time of 14‐minutes is 23% of the 60‐minute cycle time and is sufficient for on‐time operations under normal conditions.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 5 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #5‐ Lemay Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Ridership on this route does not fluctuate when CSU is in and out of session and remains relatively steady throughout the year. Route 5 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

400 Weekday Saturday

300

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

33% of the riders on Route 5 are Senior/Disabled fares, nearly double the system average, and 32% are adult fares, also above average. These trends make sense given some of the destinations along this route, such as the VA Clinic, Poudre Valley Hospital, and senior living communities. Transfers account for about 8% of ridership, same as the average transfer rate. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 5 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled

28% 33% Systemwide

6% 17% 23%

23% 37% 32%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 5 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #5‐ Lemay

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • Almost half of the ridership activity on Route 5 occurs at one of the route ends, with 23% at DTC and 25% at STC. This leads to steady loads across the length of the route. • The majority of the remaining activity occurs on Lemay between Mulberry and Stuart, which sees 38% of the route’s boardings and alightings. Despite being over a third of the route length, the Riverside and Horsetooth segments show very little ridership (3%). • Ridership is steady throughout the day, with a small northbound spike at 7AM and a large southbound spike at 2PM. The afternoon increase is a result of heavy activity at Lemay & Prospect and Lemay & Stuart.

Route 5 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

50 Northbound 45 Southbound 40

35

30

25

Boardings 20

15

10

5

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM Start of Trip

*A portion of the first trip of the day and last trip of the day were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 5 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #5‐ Lemay

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 5 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #5‐ Lemay

Route 5 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Northbound)

80 8 Average Load 70 7 Boardings 60 Alightings 6 Load

50 5 Alightings

& 40 4 Vehicle 30 3

20 2 Boardings Average 10 1

0 0

R B B B B B B S TC CT EB NB N N NB NB NB NB NB N N WB N NB R P E D E TH S R VE ST V OW ORD AKE ECT EET D A O LL F R P HO PING T D TR MAPL S OX STUART Y S VER VENUE OP & ROS LE RI A & H & SWA & & P Y LINDEN E S PARKWOOD AL ETH A & G E TH & & V RE LINCOLN O HORSETOO Y & AB D M ST AR & A E Z U & U TO LEMAY LEMAY MAY R I LE OLLE Q E Y M LEMAY E EL PO & C S A LE L E AVE E LEMAY & & ORS EM POUD E E TH H L NU & NU E Y NU E JEFFERSON A E AV AV AV LEM RIVERSIDE

LEMAY LEMAY MULBERRY

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 5‐ Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #5‐ Lemay

Route 5 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Southbound)

80 8

70 Average Load 7 Boardings 60 Alightings 6 Load

50 5 Alightings

&

40 4 Vehicle

30 3 Average Boardings 20 2

10 1

0 0 B B B B B SB S S SB B S SB SB SB S S B TC EB L S WB D E RY P AL A E W WB CTR EN V R T I K W LD R D A K I ART B E BE C P PECT M FORD FI VE JFK LN O S S TU DRA X S O & LIN O UL S & O LEMAY & HO & ST M ENN PRO COLU & SWALLO & N P Y MAN & SHOPPING O LINC & LEY & A & Y & & H S & L Y Y OTH T R & VE E A LEMAY MA A O E E A V VA LEM O MONROE F V A E LE ET O F A AY R LEM LEM T JE E LEMAY LEMAY RS SQUARE M AY UD ID LE M HO PO HORSE THE ERS LE & Y RIV A LEM

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 5‐ Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #5‐ Lemay Route 6 – Shields/Dunbar Route 6 operates south from the CSU Transit Center on Shields, west on Stuart, south on Taft Hill, east on Drake, south on Dunbar and east on Horsetooth to the South Transit Center. Transit Centers Major Destinations CSU Transit Center Colorado State University South Transit Center Colorado DMV Blevins Jr HS Rocky Mountain HS Foothills Mall

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:15 am‐7:10 pm 6:15 am‐7:10 pm 6:15 am‐7:10 pm 6:15 am‐7:10 pm Frequency (min): 60 60 60 60 Cycle Time (min): 60 60 60 60 Layover Time (min): 12 12 12 12 Route 6 is interlined with Route 16 for a combined cycle time of 120 min with 38 min of layover. Total One‐Way Trips: 25 25 25 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 13.04 12.92 12.92 12.92 Daily Rev‐Miles: 197.93 185.90 185.90 185.90 Peak Buses: 1 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 571 228 331 223

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 43.2 17.6 25.6 17.3 Ranking (4) (6) (5) (4) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 3.0 1.2 1.8 1.2 Ranking (5) (7) (6) (6) Pass./Trip: 22.8 9.1 13.2 8.9 Ranking (4) (6) (5) (2) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 6 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #6‐ Shields/Dunbar Description of Existing Alignment

Route 6 provides service to the southwest area between the CSU Transit Center and South Transit Center. From the CSU Transit Center, Route 6 travels through campus traveling north on Meridian Avenue and west on Laurel Street to Shields Street. Return trips travel east on Plum Street from Shields Street to the CTC. Route 6 travels south on Shields Street passing single family, multi‐family and commercial areas, as well as the DMV. The route turns west on Stuart Street through multi‐family and single family communities. Route 6 travels south on Taft Hill serving Blevins Junior High School, single family homes and a Safeway Shopping Center.

From here, Route 6 turns back east on Drake Road which is comprised primarily of single family homes and multi‐family communities near Dunbar Avenue. On Dunbar Avenue, the route winds south through middle to high income single family neighborhoods before continuing east on Horsetooth Road serving middle to high income commercial, single family and multi‐family areas until the route ends at the South Transit Center at Foothills Mall.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 6 is fairly indirect, winding south and west on Shields and Stuart to Taft Hill before turning back south and east to access STC via Horsetooth. Speed humps and slow speed limits on Stuart and Dunbar can slow this route. According to Transfort operators, a long left turn signal at Shields and Stuart causes delays, as well as a difficult un‐signalized left turn from Stuart to Taft Hill.

• Stops – The northbound stop at Dunbar and Horsetooth was observed to be too close to the intersection. Additionally, Transfort operators identified the eastbound stop at Horsetooth and Dunbar as a dangerous place for passengers to unload.

• Schedule – Route 6 presently operates at 60‐minute frequencies throughout the year. Ridership data shows much higher passenger volumes when CSU is in‐session. Drivers have also expressed the need for more frequent service when CSU is in‐session.

• Route Connections – The route is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 2, 3, 4 and 7 at CTC. The route does not have a good meet time at CTC with Routes 11 or 15. At STC, Route 6 is timed to meet Route 7 and FoxTrot and is interlined with Route 16, but has only limited ability to connect to Routes 1 and 5. Transfort operators also identified transfers occurring at Shields & Lake to meet Routes 2 and 3 at Prospect.

• PSD Connections – Route 6 provides service to Blevins Junior High School and Rocky Mountain High School.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Congestion on the CSU campus and in the Foothills Mall retail area, in addition to slow neighborhood streets, adversely impact run time. There is ample 38‐minutes of layover time (32%) for the 120‐minute cycle time of the interlined

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 6 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #6‐ Shields/Dunbar 6/16 route. However, drivers have indicated that Route 6 outbound bus trips are often running late in the afternoon because of CSU traffic and slow neighborhood street speeds, resulting in tight connections to the FoxTrot at the South Transit Center.

Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership when CSU is in session is 75% higher than when CSU is out of session.

Route 6 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

700 Weekday 600 Saturday

500

400

300

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 6 are primarily youth, who make up 37% of passengers on this route. This route proportionally carries more youth riders than the average route, and an average fraction of CSU riders. Transfers account for about 6% of ridership, below Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 6 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #6‐ Shields/Dunbar Route 6 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 14%

37% Systemwide 17%

17% 23%

23% 32% 37%

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • About 26% of rider activity occurred at CTC, with another 12% at STC. The next highest activity occurred at Rocky Mountain HS (9%) and Blevins Jr HS (6%). • There is steady activity along the length of the route, however vehicle loads increase with proximity to CSU, and decrease south of Rock Mountain HS. • Ridership peaks in the morning and again in the early afternoon, with highest ridership occurring between 2PM and 4PM. This roughly coincides with the end of the school day for most of the route’s riders.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 6 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #6‐ Shields/Dunbar Route 6 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

70 Northbound Southbound 60

50

40

30 Boardings

20

10

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM Start of Trip

*The first two trips of the day were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 6 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #6‐ Shields/Dunbar

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 6 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #6‐ Shields/Dunbar

Route 6 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Northbound)

200 20 Average Load 180 18 Boardings 160 Alightings 16 140 14 Load

120 12 Alightings

& 100 10 Vehicle 80 8 60 6 Boardings 40 4 Average 20 2 0 0

R B B B B B B B B B R N NB NB N N N NB EB EB EB E N NB E CT WB WB WB WB WB WB NB W W NB A G ) N R T E NTE RK F DS TH ION R K N E N SON A O ECA O NDE AKE TE T DGE A E C PI N A TIO R S I LA R A W IEL E NBAR U D TU & A M ( H S TO U HE STUART ER ERITAGE S COLONY S E GR D & S IZABETH & & & & SWALLOW HASTINGS L NC & H & D L SHOP ILL & STIT IL A ATH & E E H H ORS IRMINGHAMASA & & N RIDGEWOODONSTITU E & MOBY TRANSIT TH DM H B C R R O H M HILL C H AR O MEADOWL OT OT A A C T & RT SHIEL & U U IN O & & & & & & A S & O NB & T U LDS C Q H W ET ET NB DRAKE E TAF ILL T SHIELDS E S T SETOOTH S BAR U U H TAFT AR S E R & RS N BAR D D SHI PLUM ORSETO H N RAK T STUART UART TU TH H OO HO U D T S T HO OT HOR D DU DUNBAR TAF S RSE O O ET H S HOR

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 6 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #6‐ Shields/Dunbar

Route 6 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Southbound)

120 12 Average Load Boardings 100 10 Alightings Load

80 8 Alightings

&

Vehicle

60 6

40 4 Average Boardings

20 2

0 0 B R B SB S B B B B B B B EB E N SB SB WB WB SB E E SB S S S EB EB E E EB T T WB WB E R A S WB CTR N C HS G W RY C K E SITY R OF) ION E AM BA E LD ON ON F C R DGE JR E T LO T E I S J PLUM I FO ( U DRAKE IT GH N EN S Y AL K S HI DIT MA & & RITAGE E LL & W DU S A NHATTAN E PROSPE E VIN HI S & & & & UNIVE H THER E STIT R MIN & TR A SHOPPING & A T N AR & IR H TH H M H TRANSIT DIAN & & E RIDGEWOODBL MANCHESTERVALL F B B T T & T U I S H & CO N R BA O O & S CONSTITUTION& & & TA & O MONRO C ER LD & & & DU BA UN O TOO T TH TOO M E & ILL LL E D AR ET E E E H HILL HI E K UN B S SQUARE SHIELDS STUART T A D RS R RS ETOOTH SHI FT FT R N O S TOO ORS STUART A AF D H HO E H THE STUART TA T T DRAK DU HO STUART HOR ORS H

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 6 – Page 8 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #6‐ Shields/Dunbar Route 7 – Centre/Drake Route 7 operates south from CSU on Centre Avenue to the Fort Collins Senior Center, then continues on Drake and Stover to the South Transit Center. Transit Centers Major Destinations CSU Transit Center Colorado State University South Transit Center Fort Collins Senior Center CSU Vet School Foothills Mall Boltz Jr HS

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:45 am‐7:09 pm 6:45 am‐6:39 pm 6:45 am‐6:39 pm 6:45 am‐6:39 pm Frequency (min): 30 60 60 60 Cycle Time (min): 60 60 60 60 Layover Time (min): 12 12 12 12 Total One‐Way Trips: 46 23 23 23 Daily Rev‐Hours: 23.8 11.9 11.9 11.9 Daily Rev‐Miles: 264.72 132.36 132.36 132.36 Peak Buses: 2 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 417 133 152 110

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 18.2 11.2 13.3 9.3 Ranking (15) (11) (11) (12) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 1.6 1.0 1.2 0.8 Ranking (14) (10) (11) (11) Pass./Trip: 9.5 5.8 6.9 4.8 Ranking (11) (9) (10) (9) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 7 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #7‐ Centre/Drake Description of Existing Alignment

From the CSU Transit Center, Route 7 travels southward across the CSU campus to Centre Avenue. The route passes multi‐unit residential areas on Centre north and south of Prospect Road before winding through low‐density business park and university research areas. Route 7 then deviates to the Fort Collins Senior Center before traveling east on Drake Road.

Drake Road is highlighted by retail development at Shields Street and College Avenue, the CSU Vet School, and single family and multi‐unit residential. The route passes a smaller business park as it turns south onto Stover Street, which offers mostly residential (including multi‐unit) and passes Boltz Junior High School before looping westward to the South Transit Center.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 7 is fairly indirect, winding south and west on Centre to Shields before an east‐west segment on Drake, then tuning south and west again to access STC. The route also includes a mid‐route deviation to the senior center that adds still more time for riders wishing to directly connect between CTC and STC. Speed humps on Lake Street and significant routing across the CSU campus (with speed limits of 20 mph) can also slow this route.

• Stops – No stop issues were detected on this route.

• Schedule – Route 7 is the only route that operates variable service depending on CSU’s schedule, with 30‐minute weekday frequencies for in‐session and 60‐minute frequencies for out of session. This may prove a challenge to attracting non‐university ridership.

• Route Connections – The route is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 2, 3, 4 and 6 at CTC. The route does not have a good meet time at CTC with Routes 11 or 15. At STC, Route 7 is timed to meet Route 6/16 and FoxTrot, but due to schedule variations, has only limited ability to connect to Routes 1 and 5.

• PSD Connections – Route 7 provides service to Boltz Junior High School.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Out side of some congestion on the CSU campus or in the Foothills Mall retail area, no major on‐time issues were observed. The 60‐minute cycle time, which includes 12‐minutes of layover (20%) seems very sufficient.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 7 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #7‐ Centre/Drake Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership when CSU is in session is about three times greater than when school is out, in part due to the higher frequency of service.

Route 7 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

500 Weekday Saturday 400

300

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 7 are primarily CSU students and staff, who make up 44% of passengers on this route. This route proportionally carries more CSU and Senior/Disabled riders than the average route. Transfers account for about 5% of ridership, below Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 7 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other 19% Disabled 22%

Systemwide

17% 15% 23%

44% 23% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 7 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #7‐ Centre/Drake Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • Almost half of the ridership activity on Route 7 occurs at one of the route ends, with 27% at CTC and 20% at STC. This leads to steady loads across the length of the route. • After the transit centers, stops at the Senior Center, Drake & Shields, and Drake & Stover are the highest generators, with about 6‐7% each of total route ridership. The Drake corridor in general has the strongest rider densities on the alignment. • Ridership peaks in the morning and again in the early afternoon, with highest ridership occurring between 2PM and 3PM. This roughly coincides with the end of the junior high school day, senior center programming, and possible classes at CSU.

Route 7 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

40 Northbound Southbound 35

30

25

20

Boardings 15

10

5

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM Start of Trip

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 7 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #7‐ Centre/Drake

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 7 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #7‐ Centre/Drake

Route 7 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Northbound)

90 9

80 Average Load 8 Boardings 70 Alightings 7 Load 60 6 Alightings 50 5 &

40 4 Vehicle

30 3 Boardings 20 2 Average 10 1

0 0 B R EB B B B B B CT NB N NB NB WB WB W WB W WB WB WB NB WB EB E N NB S ) W H R H W IR F) F N C OF) DR O A RD O O RT) CT BAY (E L O A TON CENTER PING JR CL F (E DSO & Z AL L N (W M I DRAKE SEAR OP OLTZ T W E STOVER A E ‐ SCHOOL ING & CENTER RCH H B S D T K H AV RE A S & S EGE RESEARCHT D S E & BOL & & (@ VET & E NFORD & & R & ORTHINGTONE ES TRANSIT A & R IELD R R CENTRE U AR ST R KE TULAN COLL KE WO KE H SENIOR W T S U OVER DRAKE A & & LEGE CSU A A S & C Q & T L & & R RES S E S STOVE STOVER DR E O DR D CEN E O C KE AT STOVE RAK A N TH DRAKE D & E DRAKE DR CENTRE & MONR TRE DRAK N CE

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 7 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #7‐ Centre/Drake

Route 7 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Southbound)

150 10 Average Load 135 9 Boardings 120 Alightings 8

105 7 Load

90 6 Alightings

& Vehicle

75 5

60 4

45 3 Average Boardings 30 2

15 1

0 0 R B B B E B S W S EB EB EB EB EB SB SB B T S W WB WB EB EB EB ) SB SB SB CTR Y E S N K F R W WB EN KE A CTR N R ) B CH O RE LD SO TON A O OF) D F C LA H R T E D P Z O JFK & GT NTER G L (W (E DRAKE & PING SIT & EA SHI IN E LT P N N RE ARC N CE RAIN & O (W T E ES R & DAVI H EG STANFORD STRACHANSWALLOW B R HO N ES R THI & E LL OAKBROOK& E S TRA IDIA E & R & & & & E C R O E & U ER S ENIO WORT MEADOWLARK CO W S DRAK & COLLEGE & STOVER STOV MONROE CS M RE IELDS & OFESSIONA& VER & E R O & AT SH DRAK P E DRAKE STOVER STOVER STOVER SQUAR N CENTRE RE ST E T KE OE H & N DRAKE A DRAKE R T E DRAK R DRAK RE C D T MON EN C

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 7 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #7‐ Centre/Drake Route 8 – Lemay/College Route 8 operates in a counter‐clockwise loop from the Downtown Transit Center traveling north on Linden and east on Vine to Lemay, then winding north and west on Conifer, Blue Spruce, Willox and College to the Poudre Valley Mobile Home Park, before returning south on College to the DTC. Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Center Downtown Fort Collins Larimer County Department of Human Service Poudre Valley Mobile Home Park Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:22 am‐6:49 pm 6:22 am‐6:49 pm 6:22 am‐6:49 pm 6:22 am‐6:49 pm Frequency (min): 30 30 30 30 Cycle Time (min): 30 30 30 30 Layover Time (min): 3 3 3 3 Total One‐Way Trips: 25 25 25 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 12.45 12.45 12.45 12.45 Daily Rev‐Miles: 153.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 Peak Buses: 1 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 410 297 385 234

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 33.0 23.8 30.9 18.8 Ranking (6) (1) (1) (1) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 2.7 1.9 2.5 1.5 Ranking (7) (2) (2) (3) Pass./Trip: 15.2 11.0 14.3 8.7 Ranking (6) (1) (2) (4) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 18 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 15 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 8 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #8‐ Lemay/College Description of Existing Alignment

Route 8 is a counter‐clockwise loop that serves the Downtown Transit Center and areas northeast. From the DTC, Route 8 travels southeast on Jefferson Street and northeast on Linden Street through an industrial area, and east on Vine Drive, serving Larimer County Services offices and low‐density industrial areas. The route travels north on Lemay Avenue with one stop at the Alta Vista neighborhood.

From here, Route 5 turns west on Conifer Street, where it provides service to low‐density single family and multi‐family residences, as well as a community center. The route travels north on Blue Spruce Drive, providing service to the Food Bank and the Larimer County Department of Human Services. The route then travels west on Willox Lane through a commercial area and north on College Avenue, where it turns around at the Poudre Valley Mobile Home Park. Finally, Route 5 returns south on College Avenue to the DTC serving commercial areas and the Northside Aztlan Community Center.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 8 is a circuitous counter‐clockwise loop, meaning significant out‐of‐ direction travel times will be incurred by many riders. Transfort operators identified the need for a left turn signal into the Poudre Valley Mobile Home Park. The route also makes four railroad crossings.

• Stops – Transfort operators noted that stops were located across the street from the buildings, causing passengers to cross the street without crosswalks. The stop for the Senior Center on Blue Spruce requires a long walk. Operators also identified the stops on Linden Street at Willow Street and the bridge as too close together. Additionally, the eastbound stop on Vine Drive at Lemay Avenue does not have a pad or sidewalk. The stop northbound on College at Willox Lane was identified as unnecessary, as the Albertsons stop is sufficient.

• Schedule – Route 8 operates consistent 30‐minute frequencies year‐round Monday through Saturday. No major schedule issues were determined.

• Route Connections – This route has timed connections with Routes 5, 9, 14 and 18 at the DTC, but only limited connectivity to Routes 1 and 15 due to schedule variations.

• PSD Connections – There are no PSD schools served by Route 8.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Transfort operators identified an increase in the use of the wheelchair lifts on this route, which has impacted the run time. The schedule can also be impacted by train traffic, in which passengers unload at Maple Street and walk to the DTC. The layover time for this route is only 3‐minutes (10%) of the 30‐minute cycle time, leaving little time for delays.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 8 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #8‐ Lemay/College Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership when CSU is in session is only slightly higher than when school is out, at 7%. Route 8 is one of the best performing routes apart from service to CSU.

Route 8 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

500 Weekday Saturday 400

300

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

With CSU students and staff only making up 2% of the ridership, Route 8 proportionally carries more youth, adult, and senior/disabled riders than the average route. Transfers account for about 9% of ridership, slightly higher than Transfort’s average transfer rate. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 8 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled

30% 34%

Systemwide

17% 23% 2%

23% 33% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 8 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #8‐ Lemay/College Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • About 44% of ridership activity occurs at DTC. After the transit center, the two highest activity stops are at the mobile home park (10%) and the human services office (7%). • Ridership is stronger on the western half of the route (Blue Spruce, Willox, and College). Only 12% of ridership occurs on the eastern segment from Jefferson through Conifer. • Ridership peaks a bit in the mornings and afternoons and is strongest from 2PM to 5PM.

Route 8 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

60

50

40

30 Boardings 20

10

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM 7 PM Start of Trip

*The first trip of the day was not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 8 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #8‐ Lemay/College

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 8 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #8‐ Lemay/College

Route 8 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads

200 10 180 9 160 8

140 7 Load

Average Load 120 Boardings 6 Alightings Alightings &

100 5 Vehicle

80 4 60 3 Average Boardings 40 2 20 1 0 0

C B B B EB B B B B B B B B B B B SB T N N NB E NB WB W N SRV NB NB S S S S S S S TC D F) A W WB R W E E ) E D W T E PARK N ER INE IN PL OF) O IS AY O V GE LO (E V MAIN M SOC OF) LLOX ILLOX LEGE D A L (N E OOD I L ALP & RI M BRIDGE N A & L W (W W OME W O LEC ONIF B WI M E CONIF CASSIDY H C C & E & & & MATUKA D & & IST E G E & N ALT R & E & CONE LE N & OF G IND & E SUGARPINE R LE I BR G LLE S L IF & B ( DEN INGHA & LEMAY ER & BUTCH O & LLE CO NE N IF R R SPRUCE 1601 LLEGE OLLE N LINDE VI E E RIST & M & CO C LI NE CO SPRUCE B COLLEGE V COLLEGE BUCK VI CON E & P CO BLUE GE & CONIF CONIF & N BLU COLLEGE OODLAWN RUCE SPRUCE OLLE DE P C W N S & LI BLUE WILLOX BLUE LLEGE CO

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 8 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #8‐ Lemay/College Route 9 – Vine/Laporte Route 9 operates in a counter clockwise loop from the Downtown Transit Center via Cherry and Wood to Vine, returning back to the DTC via Overland Trail and LaPorte Avenue. Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Center Downtown Fort Collins Lincoln Jr HS Mt. View Jr HS Poudre HS Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:52 am‐6:15 pm 6:52 am‐6:15 pm 6:52 am‐6:15 pm 6:52 am‐6:15 pm Frequency (min): 60 60 60 60 Cycle Time (min): 30 30 30 30 Layover Time (min): 7 7 7 7 Route 9 is interlined with Route 14 for a combined cycle time of 60 min with 7 min of layover. Total One‐Way Trips: 13 13 13 13 Daily Rev‐Hours: 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.60 Daily Rev‐Miles: 84.12 84.12 84.12 84.12 Peak Buses: 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 238 113 136 80

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 42.5 20.1 24.4 14.3 Ranking (5) (4) (6) (8) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 2.8 1.3 1.6 1.0 Ranking (6) (5) (8) (10) Pass./Trip: 19.8 9.4 11.4 6.7 Ranking (5) (5) (6) (7) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 9 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #9‐ Vine/Laporte Description of Existing Alignment

Route 9 is a counter‐clockwise loop route that serves areas west of the Downtown Transit Center. From the DTC, Route 9 travels north on Mason Street, west on Cherry Street and north on Wood Street through low and middle income single family areas. Route 9 travels west on Vine serving single family and multi‐family areas, deviating onto the Lincoln Junior High School campus.

From here the route travels south on Overland Trail, through low density single family and west on LaPorte Avenue serving single family and multi‐family residences, as well as Poudre High School, City Park, Fort Collins Housing Authority and Larimer County offices. The route returns north on Mason to the DTC.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 9 is a counter‐clockwise loop that is fairly direct, with one deviation to Lincoln Jr. High School. Because the route is one‐way, a fair amount of out‐of‐ direction may be required for riders to reach their destination. Transfort operators indicated that LaPorte Avenue does not warrant enough demand for service from both Routes 9 and 4.

• Stops – No stop issues were detected on this route.

• Schedule – Route 9 operates at a 60‐minute schedule, which can be especially challenging on a one‐way route since it often means longer travel times for riders to travel around the loop.

• Route Connections – The route is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 5, 8 and 18 at the DTC, and is interlined with Route 14. Due to schedule variations, Route 9 has only limited connectivity to Routes 1 and 15 at the DTC.

• PSD Connections – Route 9 provides service to Lincoln Junior High School, Mountain View Junior High School and Poudre High School.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – No major on‐time issues were observed, with the exception of the Route 14 interline carrying delays over into Route 9. The layover time for Route 9 is 7‐minutes or 23% of the 30‐minute cycle time; however, the interlined Route 14 has 30 minutes of run time with no layover time, for a combined cycle time of 60‐minutes with 7‐minutes of layover.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 9 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #9‐ Vine/Laporte Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership when school is in session is about 75% greater than when school is out, due to the two junior high schools and one high school that this route serves.

Route 9 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

300 Weekday Saturday

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 9 are primarily youth, who make up 60% of passengers on this route. Only four percent of the riders are CSU students and staff. Transfers account for about 9% of ridership, slightly higher than Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 9 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 15%

Systemwide

21% 17% 23% 60%

23% 4% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 9 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #9‐ Vine/Laporte

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • 73% of riders on this route use one of only three stops: DTC (42%), Poudre HS (16%) or Lincoln Jr HS (15%). • Remaining ridership is spread fairly evenly along the rest of the route. Only 3 boardings and 7 alightings (2% of riders) occurred west of Sunset Street. • Ridership peaks in the early morning (6AM) and again in the early afternoon, with highest ridership occurring between 2PM and 3PM. This roughly coincides with the school day of most of this route’s riders.

Route 9 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

45

40

35

30

25

20 Boardings 15

10

5

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM Start of Trip

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 9 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #9‐ Vine/Laporte

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 9 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #9‐ Vine/Laporte

Route 9 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads

130 13 120 Average Load 12 110 Boardings 11 Alightings 100 10 90 9 Load

80 8 Alightings

& 70 7

Vehicle 60 6 50 5 Average

Boardings 40 4 30 3 20 2 10 1 0 0 B B B C B B B SB B SB E E EB E B B NB NB W WB WB SB EB EB EB EB E E EB EB DT WB WB W W WB WB WB W E D D F) H S DTC D S H D GH O SET W H OF) S SET VIN I E O LD TON MIS ERRY ELM OF) HILL H O N IE G OMIS O H & JR (N IRI & RLAN W BRYAN (W AMIT OWES WOOD C WEST (W WOO & E SU IMPALANDVI J SH IN LO H R LO D WOO & & SUN D & & S & H ERWOOD & O & TAFT OV & A N & & & HE & OLN VINE & AN E R O E E E H S Y D O NE C & INE L AND & HOLLY G AS S R W NE I N & V HOLLY R L LY W & & V LI R ER & & ER VI HANNA E VINE & VE E & & WOO & C VINE O V LAPORTEE CHERRY H N E O LAPORT LAPORTE T LAPORT TE ERRY C N R LAPORTR LAPORT H LA VI LAPORTE O O C VINE LAPORTE P P LAPORTE LAPORT LA LA

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 9 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #9‐ Vine/Laporte Route 11 – Plum Route 11 operates west on Plum from the CSU Transit Center, looping on City Park, Elizabeth, Constitution and back east on Plum to the CTC.

Transit Centers Major Destinations CSU Transit Center Colorado State University Ram’s Village

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:58 am‐6:18 pm n/a n/a n/a Frequency (min): 20 n/a n/a n/a Cycle Time (min): 20 n/a n/a n/a Layover Time (min): 4 n/a n/a n/a Total One‐Way Trips: 38 n/a n/a n/a Daily Rev‐Hours: 14.46 n/a n/a n/a Daily Rev‐Miles: 104.97 n/a n/a n/a Peak Buses: 2** n/a n/a n/a FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 1,380 n/a n/a n/a

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 95.4 n/a n/a n/a Ranking (1) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 13.1 n/a n/a n/a Ranking (1) Pass./Trip: 30.0 n/a n/a n/a Ranking (1) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session. **Supplemental a.m. peak service is provided from 7:22 a.m. to 10:24 a.m.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 11 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #11‐ Plum Description of Existing Alignment

Route 11 serves student housing areas just west of the campus. From the CSU Transit Center, the route travels west across campus on Plum Street, south on City Park Avenue, west on Elizabeth Street, north on Constitution Avenue and east on Plum Street to return to the CTC. The route primarily serves several student housing complexes, including Ram’s Village, and commercial areas west of the campus.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – The end‐of‐line loop at the western end of the route creates some out of direction travel. Routing across the CSU campus (with speed limits of 20 mph) can slow this route.

• Stops – No stop issues were detected on this route.

• Schedule – Route 11 only operates when CSU is in session at 20‐minute frequencies, which make it difficult to connect with other routes at the CTC. Trailer buses are used to alleviate overcrowding during morning peak period, which can cause difficulty for some riders who are passed by a full bus or want to understand which bus to board.

• Route Connections – The route has untimed transfer meets with Routes 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 15 at the CTC.

• PSD Connections – No PSD schools are located on this route.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – This route suffers from overcrowding and uses trailer buses to reduce overcrowding in the morning from 7:22 a.m. to 10:24 a.m. The layover time of 4‐minutes is 20% of the 20‐minute cycle time. This is likely sufficient except during peak travel times.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 11 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #11‐ Plum Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Route 11 only operates on weekdays when CSU is in session, with the months of January and February comprising the highest average daily ridership. When in operation, this route ranks first in riders/hour, riders/mile, and riders/trip.

Route 11 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

2,000

1,800 Weekday

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 11 are almost all CSU students and staff, who make up 97% of passengers on this route. Transfers account for about less than one percent of ridership, below Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 11 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

1% 1% Youth CSU Adult 1% Senior/ Other Disabled

Systemwide

17% 23%

23% 97% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 11 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #11‐ Plum

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • As expected given the nature of this route, half the ridership activity occurs at the CTC. • Of the other stops, the two at Ram’s Village combine to serve 18% of the riders. Constitution & Elizabeth serve 13%, and City Park & Plum serve 8%. • Ridership almost exactly demonstrates two mirror‐image curves. Eastbound ridership (to campus) peaks in the morning between 8AM and 10AM then tapers to nothing. Westbound ridership (from campus) starts from nothing and increases to a longer flatter peak in the afternoon from 1PM to 5PM.

Route 11 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

140 Eastbound 120 Westbound

100

80

60 Boardings

40

20

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM Start of Trip

*Three morning trips were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 11 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #11‐ Plum

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 11 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #11‐ Plum

Route 11 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Eastbound)

800 24 Average Load Boardings 700 21 Alightings

600 18

500 15 Load

Alightings

& 400 12 Vehicle

300 9 Boardings Average

200 6

100 3

0 0 CONSTITUTION & ELIZABETH RAM'S VILLAGE WEST EB RAM'S VILLAGE EAST EB PLUM & BLUEBELL EB PLUM & MOBY ARENA EB CSU TRANSIT CENTER NB

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 11 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #11‐ Plum

Route 11 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Westbound)

720 18 Average Load 640 Boardings 16 Alightings

560 14

480 12 Load

Alightings

400 10 &

Vehicle

320 8 Average Boardings 240 6

160 4

80 2

0 0 CSU TRANSIT CENTER MOBY (N OF) WB PLUM & COLUMBINE WB CITY PARK & PLUM SB ELIZABETH & CITY PARK WB CONSTITUTION & ELIZABETH NB

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 11 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #11‐ Plum Route 14 – Lincoln/Mulberry Route 14 operates east from the Downtown Transit Center via Lincoln and the Mulberry frontage roads to I‐25. The route returns on roughly the same alignment. Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Center Downtown Fort Collins Northside Aztlan Center Wal‐Mart

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:20 am‐6:51 pm 6:20 am‐6:51 pm 6:20 am‐6:51 pm 6:20 am‐6:51 pm Frequency (min): 60 60 60 60 Cycle Time (min): 30 30 30 30 Layover Time (min): 0 0 0 0 Route 14 is interlined with Route 9 for a combined cycle time of 60 min with 7 min of layover. Total One‐Way Trips: 25 25 25 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 6.92 6.92 6.92 6.92 Daily Rev‐Miles: 115.44 115.44 115.44 115.44 Peak Buses: 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 191 151 186 128

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 27.6 21.8 26.8 18.6 Ranking (7) (3) (4) (2) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 1.7 1.3 1.6 1.1 Ranking (11) (6) (9) (7) Pass./Trip: 7.3 5.8 7.1 4.9 Ranking (12) (8) (9) (8) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 14 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #14‐ Lincoln/Mulberry Description of Existing Alignment

Route 14 is an east‐west route that travels between the Downtown Transit Center and I‐25. From the downtown transit center, Route 14 travels east on Lincoln Avenue, east on Mulberry Street and S. Frontage Road and turns back via N. Frontage Road at Centro Way, and continues west on Frontage Road, north on Summit View Drive, west on Donella Court, south on Timberline Road, and northwest on Lincoln Avenue to return to the DTC.

This route serves mostly low‐ and medium‐density office, industrial and commercial areas with some low income single‐family residential south of Mulberry and a large multi‐family area along Lincoln east of Lemay. Additionally, indirect access to the back of the Wal‐Mart Shopping Center on Mulberry is provided along this route.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 14 is fairly direct from the DTC to Mulberry Street along Lincoln Avenue. At Mulberry Street, the route begins to make deviations on S. Frontage Road eastbound and from N. Frontage Road northbound to Timberline Road. The route does not get close enough to good trip generators in the area (e.g., Wal‐Mart, the mobile home park on Timberline, the low income neighborhood south of Mulberry) to be as effective as it could. Additionally, this route has a dangerous left turn from Mulberry Street to the N. Frontage Road and a difficult right turn with an immediate left turn from Lincoln Avenue to Timberline Road to Mulberry Street and S. Frontage Road.

• Stops – Several stops were identified as hazardous or difficult along the route, primarily east of the Lincoln Avenue segment. The stop at Centro Way does not have a curb or shelter. The stop at Timberline Road and S. Frontage Rd. is dangerous. Transfort operators identified the need for a westbound stop at Delozier Drive and N. Frontage Road. A bus shelter was also recommended for the stop on Donnella Court. Stop spacing along this route, particularly on Mulberry, can be very wide.

• Schedule – 60‐minute service over what is essentially a one‐way loop along Mulberry makes attracting riders difficult.

• Route Connections – The route is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 5, 8 and 18 at the DTC, and is interlined with Route 9. Due to schedule variations, Route 14 has only limited connectivity to Routes 1 and 15 at the DTC.

• PSD Connections – Route 14 does not serve any PSD schools.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Route 14 experiences significant delays due to traffic congestion on Mulberry Street. Additionally, this route does not have any layover time, leading to no chance for recovery. Given these factors, the 60‐minute combined cycle time for Routes 14 and 9, with only 7‐minutes of layover, is not sufficient.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 14 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #14‐ Lincoln/Mulberry Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership when CSU is in session is relatively the same compared to when school is out, with only a three percent change.

Route 14 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

300 Weekday Saturday

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders are primarily adult fares, who make up 40% of passengers on this route. Route 14 proportionally carries more adults, youth, and senior/disabled riders and very few CSU riders. Transfers account for about 22% of ridership, much higher than Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 14 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 22% 30%

Systemwide

17% 23%

7% 23% 37% 40%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 14 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #14‐ Lincoln/Mulberry

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • About 40% of ridership activity occurs at DTC. Another 13% is at Lincoln & Lemay, behind the Wal‐Mart and near a large multi‐unit complex. • Ridership is stronger on Lincoln than on Mulberry, though there is consistent activity along the length of the entire route. • Ridership peaks a bit in the morning, but is most strong through the afternoon, from 1PM to 5PM. This could be attributed to shoppers and employees accessing the Wal‐ Mart and other commercial/industrial destinations along the route.

Route 14 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

20

18 Eastbound 16 Westbound

14

12

10

Boardings 8

6

4

2

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM Start of Trip

*The first trip of the day was not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 14 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #14‐ Lincoln/Mulberry Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 14 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #14‐ Lincoln/Mulberry

Route 14 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Eastbound)

120 12

110 Average Load 11 Boardings 100 10 Alightings 90 9

80 8 Load

Alightings

70 7 & 60 6 Vehicle

50 5

Boardings 40 4 Average 30 3

20 2

10 1

0 0 DTC JEFFERSON & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & HIGHWAY 14 S FRONTAGE S FRONTAGE N FRNTAGE & LINDEN EB SECOND EB LEMAY EB LINK LANE EB LINCOLN CT AIRPARK EB AIRWAY EB & & SUMMIT & W OF CENTRO WY EB TIMBERLINE VIEW EB DAWN EB WB EB

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 14 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #14‐ Lincoln/Mulberry

Route 14 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Westbound)

80 8 Average Load Boardings 70 7 Alightings

60 6 Load 50 5 Alightings

&

Vehicle

40 4

30 3 Average Boardings

20 2

10 1

0 0 N FRNTAGE & N FRONTAGE DONELLA & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & LINCOLN & MOUNTAIN & MOUNTAIN & DTC CENTRO WY & SUMMIT SUMMIT AIRWAY WB AIRPARK WB LINCOLN CT LINK LANE WB LEMAY WB FIRST WB WILLOW SB WALNUT WB OLD TOWN WB VIEW WB VIEW WB WB SQ WB

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 14 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #14‐ Lincoln/Mulberry Route 15 – Howes/Mason Route 15 operates between the Downtown Transit Center and the CSU Transit Center via Mason or Howes and Meldrum.

Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Center Downtown Fort Collins CSU Transit Center Colorado State University

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:14 am‐6:53 pm 6:14 am‐6:53 pm 6:14 am‐6:53 pm 6:14 am‐6:53 pm Frequency (min): 20 20 20 20 Cycle Time (min): 20 20 20 20 Layover Time (min): 4 4 4 4 Route 15 is interlined with Route 1 for a combined cycle time of 100 min with 14 min of layover. Total One‐Way Trips: 75 75 75 75 Daily Rev‐Hours: 16.47 16.47 16.47 16.47 Daily Rev‐Miles: 104.88 104.88 104.88 104.88 Peak Buses: 1 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 411 151 367 128

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 24.9 16.2 22.3 12.4 Ranking (9) (8) (7) (9) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 3.9 2.5 3.5 1.9 Ranking (4) (1) (1) (1) Pass./Trip: 5.4 3.5 4.8 2.7 Ranking (15) (12) (12) (12) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Rotue 15 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #15‐ Howes/Mason Description of Existing Alignment

Route 15 provides service between the Downtown Transit Center and the CSU Transit Center. From the CSU Transit Center, Route 15 travels north along Meldrum Street through residential areas and east onto Magnolia Street. Northbound trips travel on Mason Street to the DTC and southbound trips return via Howes Street, traveling through the downtown commercial and governmental districts.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 15 is fairly direct, traveling north and south on Meldrum and the Howes/Mason one‐way pair. A difficult left turn is made from Magnolia to Mason Street with no traffic signal. On‐street diagonal parking is prevalent along this route.

• Stops – There are no stops on Mason between Olive and the DTC through what is essentially Fort Collins’ central business district.

• Schedule – The 20‐minute frequencies on this route can make connecting to other routes which operate at 30‐ or 60‐minute headways difficult.

• Route Connections – Route 15 is interlined with Route 1 at the DTC. Due to schedule variations, transfers to Routes 5, 8, 9, 14 and 18 at the DTC are not evenly timed. Likewise, transfer connections at CTC to Routes 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 11 are not able to be made easily.

• PSD Connections – Route 15 does not serve any PSD schools.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – No major on‐time issues were observed on the route itself; however, Route 15’s schedule can be negatively impacted by trains on Mason Street. The interline with Route 1 has only 14‐minutes of layover time (14%) with a 100‐ minute cycle time. Given the congestion on Route 1, this recovery time is insufficient to prevent delays from seeping onto Route 15.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Rotue 15 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #15‐ Howes/Mason Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership when CSU is in session is about 15% higher than when school is out.

Route 15 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

500 Weekday Saturday 400

300

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 15 are equally dispersed, with CSU students and staff making up the smallest proportion of ridership at 19% despite the route reaching CTC. Transfers account for about 15% of ridership, almost double Transfort’s average transfer rate. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 15 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled

27% 28%

Systemwide

17% 23%

19% 23% 26% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Rotue 15 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #15‐ Howes/Mason Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • This route essentially connects riders between the DTC and CTC. Over 40% of trip activity occurs at the DTC, and over 48% occurs at CTC. Only 11% of ridership is using one of the seven other stops on this route. • The route appears to peak later than most in the system, with a morning peak at 10AM and an afternoon peak from 3PM to 6PM.

Route 15 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

Northbound 50 Southbound 45

40

35

30

25

Boardings 20

15

10

5

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM Start of Trip

*Two morning trips were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Rotue 15 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #15‐ Howes/Mason

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Rotue 15 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #15‐ Howes/Mason

Route 15 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Northbound)

240 8 Average Load Boardings 210 7 Alightings

180 6

150 5 Load

Alightings

& 120 4 Vehicle

90 3 Boardings Average

60 2

30 1

0 0 CSU TRANSIT CENTER MELDRUM & MYRTLE (S OF) NB MAGNOLIA & MELDRUM (W OF) EB MASON & OLIVE NB DTC

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 15 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #15‐ Howes/Mason

Route 15 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Southbound)

210 7 Average Load Boardings 180 6 Alightings

150 5 Load

Alightings 120 4

& Vehicle

90 3 Average Boardings

60 2

30 1

0 0 DTC HOWES & LAPORTE SB HOWES & MOUNTAIN SB MAGNOLIA & HOWES (W OF) MELDRUM & MYRTLE (S OF) SB CSU TRANSIT CENTER WB

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 15 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #15‐ Howes/Mason Route 16 – Harmony Route 16 travels from the South Transit Center south on John F. Kennedy/Boardwalk, east on Harmony to the Poudre Valley Hospital Harmony (PVH)Campus before looping on Corbett, Rock Creek, Ziegler and Harmony back to PVH. Transit Centers Major Destinations South Transit Center Foothills Mall PVH Harmony Campus Preston Jr HS Fossil Ridge HS Intel/Avago/HP/AMD Front Range Village Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:20 am‐6:41 pm 6:20 am‐6:41 pm 6:20 am‐6:41 pm 6:20 am‐6:41 pm Frequency (min): 30 60 30 60 Cycle Time (min): 60 60 60 60 Layover Time (min): 26 26 26 26 Every other trip is interlined with Route 6 for a combined cycle time of 120 min with 38 min of layover. Total One‐Way Trips: 50 25 50 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 23.18 11.33 23.18 11.33 Daily Rev‐Miles: 238.05 121.77 238.05 121.77 Peak Buses: 2 1 2 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 292 117 254 119

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 12.6 10.3 11.0 10.5 Ranking (16) (12) (12) (10) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.0 Ranking (15) (12) (12) (9) Pass./Trip: 5.8 4.7 5.1 4.8 Ranking (14) (11) (11) (10) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 16 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #16‐ Harmony Description of Existing Alignment

Route 16 serves the South Transit Center and areas southeast. From the STC at Foothills Mall, Route 16 travels south on John F. Kennedy Parkway and Boardwalk Drive serving retail, office, single family and multi‐family areas. The route travels east on Harmony Road where it serves retail and multifamily areas. Route 16 travels south into the Poudre Valley Hospital Harmony Campus, and continues eastbound on Timberwood Drive and south on Corbett Drive serving middle and high income multi‐family and single family communities, as well as Preston Junior High School.

From here, the route travels east on Rock Creek Drive to Fossil Ridge High School and north on Ziegler Road, where it serves the Harmony Technology Park. Route 16 returns westbound via Harmony Road, making a northbound deviation on Corbett Drive to serve Front Range Village mixed‐use retail and office center. The route then returns to the PVH Harmony Campus via Snow Mesa Drive and Timberwood Drive and travels north on Timberline Road to return to Harmony Road westbound.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 16 is fairly indirect, winding south on John F. Kennedy Parkway and Boardwalk Drive before an east‐west segment on Harmony Road. The route then makes a series of loops east of Timberline Road to serve the hospital and the community around the schools. The route also includes a deviation to the Front Range Village. Transfort operators noted that the deviation to the hospital slows the route down, and the current alignment reflects some attempts to address these concerns.

• Stops – No stop issues were detected on this route.

• Schedule – With every other trip interlined with Route 6, riders may have trouble understanding which trip to board should they wish to through‐travel onto Route 6.

• Route Connections – The route is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 7 and FoxTrot at STC, but due to schedule variations, has only limited ability to connect to Routes 1 and 5. Every other trip is interlined with Route 6. Transfers to Route 17 occur at Corbett Drive and Harmony Road.

• PSD Connections – Route 16 provides service to Preston Junior High School and Fossil Ridge High School.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – This route has an excessively long layover, with 26‐ minutes (43%) of a 60‐minute cycle time for the stand‐alone run, and 38‐minutes (32%) of a 120‐minute cycle time for the Route 6/16 interline.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 16 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #16‐ Harmony Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Ridership appears to be trending upward, with weekday growth of 23% and Saturday growth of 40% from the last half of 2007 to the first half of 2008.

Route 16 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

400 Weekday Saturday

300

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 16 are primarily youth and adults, who make up 37% and 35% of the passengers on this route, respectively. CSU students and staff make up only 11% of the riders. Transfers account for about 17% of ridership, twice Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 16 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 17%

37% Systemwide

17% 23%

35% 23% 11% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 16 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #16‐ Harmony

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • About 37% of ridership activity occurs at STC. Only 4% occurred at the Cobett & Harmony where riders can transfer to Route 17. [Note that the ride check predates the route realignment into Front Range Village and around PVH Harmony campus.] • Aside from STC, the highest ridership was generated at Fossil Ridge HS (9%). PVH Harmony (7%) and the Harmony segment from Boardwalk to Timberline (21%) were also strong generators. • Ridership peaks a bit in the morning, but is most strong through the afternoon, with highest ridership northbound from 3PM to 4PM. The bulk of this activity occurs at Fossil Ridge HS.

Route 16 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

45 Eastbound 40 Westbound 35

30

25

20 Boardings 15

10

5

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM 7 PM Start of Trip

*The first trip of the day was not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 16 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #16‐ Harmony

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 16 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #16‐ Harmony

Route 16 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Eastbound)

140 7

120 Average Load 6 Boardings 100 Alightings 5 Load

Alightings

80 4 & Vehicle

60 3

40 2 Average Boardings

20 1

0 0 B B B EB E E B B B SB SB SB S SB EB N EB SB E NB W CTR F F D Y AN O O OF IC R D D N JFK T T N O O & M WAY S ST CARE LI R O T S AS A C CIRCLE LE ROA M LK R EA E E W E K Y CORBETT G R AR ROU N R NS IE LE H SHOPPING T AL O R A & Z G & HORSETOOTH & AT URGENT & IMBER IE WHAL W E S INDIGO T Z T & K D U AL & H WOM & & & BOARDWA K AR W MCMU RBET SQUARE JFK W MP DR DRIVE AD O D AL BO & & A C Y Y C MESA EK O THE AR & N N E ZIEGLE R Y O O NY Y BO ARDW N O TIMBERWOOD CR O O M M K ON B M R R SNOW CORBETT C R HA HA RO HARM HA H HARM PV

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 16 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #16‐ Harmony

Route 16 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Westbound)

70 7 Average Load 60 Boardings 6 Alightings

50 5 Load

Alightings 40 4

&

Vehicle

30 3

20 2 Average Boardings 10 1

0 0

B B B B B S NB N NB WB WB WB WB WB W N NB W CTR Y IC F Y LK K N S O ON LI OF) JF C CARE PU ST WA & M E S DWA S AM (W LEMAY R E AR N C W & E AR ANDINGS O H CORBETT A Y L R SHOPPING & & Y INE R TROUTMAN & N L R HAL BO T URGENT ON W & & Y WOM Y W MO M MU & K UARE A K P Q AR TIMBER L K S ORBET ES H MC HARMONY PKW E C M & & JF H CAMPUS FK T PVH Y DWA J TIMBERWOOD ON AR BOARDWALK SNOW O M B AR HARMONY H HARMONY PVH

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 16 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #16‐ Harmony Route 17 ‐ Timberline Route 17 operates from the Sharp Point/Midpoint business park west on Prospect to Timberline, continuing to Harmony where it winds over and back to Ziegler. Transit Centers Major Destinations none Larimer County Detention Center Larimer County Human Services City of Fort Collins Police Dept Rigden Farms Senior Living Fort Collins HS / Preston Jr HS PVH Harmony Campus AMD/Avago/HP/Intel Front Range Village Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:45 am‐7:36 pm 6:45 am‐7:36 pm 6:45 am‐7:36 pm 6:45 am‐7:36 pm Frequency (min): 60 60 60 60 Cycle Time (min): 60 60 60 60 Layover Time (min): 26 26 26 26 Route 17 is interlined with Route 18 for a combined cycle time of 120 min with 44 min of layover. Total One‐Way Trips: 25 25 25 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 12.23 12.23 12.23 12.23 Daily Rev‐Miles: 167.81 167.1 167.81 167.81 Peak Buses: 1 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 93 60 101 47

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 7.6 4.9 8.2 3.8 Ranking (16) (13) (13) (13) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.3 Ranking (16) (13) (13) (13) Pass./Trip: 3.6 2.3 3.9 1.8 Ranking (16) (13) (13) (13) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 17 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #17‐ Timberline Description of Existing Alignment

From Prospect Parkway and Midpoint Drive, Route 17 travels west on Prospect Road to Timberline Road. (Return trips travel east on Prospect Road from Timberline Road, south on Sharp Point Drive and north on Midpoint Drive to Prospect Parkway and Midpoint Drive.) This area is comprised of office parks, Larimer County Human Services and the Larimer County Detention Center. From Timberline Road, the route continues south passing single family homes and the City of Fort Collins Police Department. At Drake Road, Route 17 deviates east, then south on Kansas Drive, west on Limon Drive, south on Iowa Drive and west on Custer Drive to serve multi‐family neighborhoods, Rigden Farms Senior Living and King Soopers.

The route returns south on Timberline Road serving high‐income single family and multi‐family areas, offices and Fort Collins High School. Route 17 turns east on Harmony Road and deviates into Poudre Valley Hospital Harmony Campus before returning to Harmony Road via Snow Mesa Drive. The route continues east on Harmony Road past commercial and office buildings to Ziegler Road, then west on Timberwood Drive, where it serves new single family and multi‐ family neighborhoods, as well as Preston Junior High School. From here, the route travels north on Corbett Drive, crossing Harmony Road to serve the Front Range Village before returning to Harmony Road to make the return trip west to Timberline Road.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 17 provides somewhat direct service on Timberline, but with several loops and deviations to the Midpoint/Sharp Point business area, Rigden Farms Senior Living, PVH Harmony Campus, Preston Jr HS, and Front Range Village. Transfort operators identified the Ridgen Farms deviation and Midpoint Drive deviations as being too long and unnecessary. They also suggested exempting buses from the right turn only lane on Drake Road to eliminate unnecessary lane changes.

• Stops – Operators identified the need for an additional stop on the northside of Prospect Road at Midpoint Drive. There are no stops for a long segment from Prospect & Mid Point until Timberline & Nancy Gray/Charles Brockman.

• Schedule – No schedule issues were noted on this route.

• Route Connections – Route 17 is scheduled for timed transfer meets with Routes 16 at Corbett & Harmony. This route is interlined with Route 18.

• PSD Connections – Route 17 provides service to Preston Junior High School and Fort Collins High School.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – There are no major on‐time issues for this route. The 44‐minute layover time (37% of the 120‐minute interlined cycle time) is a bit excessive.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 17 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #17‐ Timberline Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Despite very low ridership, Route 17 has shown steady gains since its implementation in April 2007. Weekday boardings have increased 54% from the last half of 2007 to the first half of 2008, and Saturday boardings have almost doubled in that time.

Route 17 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

150 Weekday Saturday

100

50

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 17 are primarily adults, who make up almost half of the passengers on this route. Transfers account for about 24% of ridership, highest in the system. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 17 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 16% 29%

Systemwide

17% 23% 6%

23% 48% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 17 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #17‐ Timberline

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • 13% of boardings and alightings happen at the northern endpoint (Midpoint & Prospect Parkway) and about 8% occurs at the southern endpoint (Corbett & Harmony). [Note that the ride check predates the route realignment into Front Range Village and around PVH Harmony campus.] • Ridership is scattered across this route. About 9‐12% of activity is generated at each of the following stops: Fort Collins HS, PCH Harmony, Timberline & Horsetooth, and Prospect & Prospect Parkway. Only 2 riders accessed the route on Timberline between Prospect and Drake. • Ridership peaks some in the morning and then remains steady from noon till 5PM.

Route 17 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

8 Northbound 7 Southbound 6

5

4

Boardings 3

2

1

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM 7 PM Start of Trip

*Portions of the first trip and last trip of the day were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 17 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #17‐ Timberline

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 17 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #17‐ Timberline

Route 17 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Northbound)

25 5 Average Load 20 Boardings 4 Alightings Load

15 3 Alightings

&

Vehicle

10 2 Boardings 5 1 Average

0 0 B B EB B SB S B NB NB NB WB WB N NB NB NB EB W NB N E E E Y CT Y RD N N RD V DR D A RD TY A ESA I DR DR RI S R H N W M RL TO D S GR PARKWAY C E S OU R K W B S NSA T PECT A COU R B A INOI S M MIDPOINT IM ILE RI NOI K R PA NO T M A I ILL ANCE & E & HARMONY S C & N PRO M CT & & & VERMONT ILL R & & DR I E & OF & D D & D RD HORSETOOTH & R D PROSPEC E T AR R RD D R & V L OSP DR E & R E RI IN & R EA ST N E O P LI IMON INE RD D P PARKWAY & LINE RD DRIVE L RAK T DR & Y ER D T R N B TER D CORBETT O LINE POIN SHARP T HARMONY M TIMBER IM ER R T B CUS TIMBERL RP DPOIN TIMBERLIN PROSPECT A PROSPECT M H MI HA TI S MIDPOIN

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 17 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #17‐ Timberline

Route 17 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Southbound)

30 6

Average Load 25 Boardings 5 Alightings Load 20 4 Alightings

&

15 3 Vehicle

10 2 Average Boardings

5 1

0 0

B B B B EB B B NB SB E S S SB SB NB SB N N R W WB R D W D S D R DR RD RD INT DR OI ANE CT O IS H L CARE P N ROAD D AS OT NE R ID ILLI O I NY O M ROCKMA O F B ILLINO KANS ML IF & VERMONT CARIBOU I URGENT G & & AND & T HARMONY HARMONY & & S & & AY RD HORSET U HARM R & DR RD D KW DR & RD MP & RD DR R CHARLES ON DRIVE INE A D & R RD L C PA DRAKE M E LINE ETT LI ER R NY MESA B CT DR INE B O WOO E M ZIEGLER R P CUST ERL I COR S B T O TIMBERLINE TIMBE SNOW M HARM TIMBE PR BERLINE TI M VH TI P

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 17 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #17‐ Timberline Route 18 – Prospect/Whedbee Route 18 travels south from the Downtown Transit Center via Mason/Howe, Whedbee and Stover, and travels east on Prospect to Sharp Point and south on Riverside to EPIC. Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Downtown Fort Collins Center Fort Collins Museum & Public Library Centennial HS / Lesher Jr HS Edora Pool and Ice Center (EPIC) Larimer County Human Services Larimer County Detention Center Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:15 am‐7:14 pm 6:15 am‐7:14 pm 6:15 am‐7:14 pm 6:15 am‐7:14 pm Frequency (min): 60 60 60 60 Cycle Time (min): 60 60 60 60 Layover Time (min): 18 18 18 18 Route 18 is interlined with Route 17 for a combined cycle time of 120 min with 44 min of layover. Total One‐Way Trips: 25 25 25 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 11.48 11.48 11.48 11.48 Daily Rev‐Miles: 142.74 142.74 142.74 142.74 Peak Buses: 1 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 216 138 190 108

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 18.8 12.0 16.5 9.4 Ranking (12) (10) (10) (11) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 1.5 1.0 1.3 0.8 Ranking (13) (11) (10) (12) Pass./Trip: 8.3 5.3 7.3 4.1 Ranking (11) (10) (8) (11) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 18 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #18‐ Prospect/Whedbee Description of Existing Alignment

From the Downtown Transit Center, Route 18 travels south on Howes Street and east on Olive Street. (Return trips travel north on Mason Street to the DTC). This area is comprised of downtown Fort Collins and includes City of Fort Collins and Larimer County offices, as well as the Post Office, Fort Collins Museum, Fort Collins Public Library and DMA. Route 18 travels south on Whedbee Street serving single family areas and Centennial High School.

From here, the route turns east on Elizabeth Street and south on Stover Street to Prospect Road through single family residential areas and Lesher Junior High School. The route turns east on Prospect Road serving single family and multi‐family residences, neighborhood retail and offices. The route turns south on Riverside Avenue where it serves the Edora Pool and Ice Center (EPIC) and the Arbors at Sweetgrass Apartments. The route returns to Prospect Road where it continues east to Sharp Point Drive, and travels in a loop south to Midpoint Drive and north to Prospect Road.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Route 18 is fairly indirect, winding south and east through downtown Fort Collins and older residential areas before making an end of line loop from Prospect Road at Sharp Point Drive and Midpoint Drive. A significant deviation also occurs to serve EPIC. This deviation does not have a specified turnaround, and buses turn around in the EPIC parking lot. Additionally, this route can be delayed by trains on Mason Street, with two rail crossings outbound to Howes Street and parallel tracks on Mason Street inbound.

• Stops – There are no stops on Mason or Howes through what is essentially Fort Collin’s central business district. Transfort operators also identified the need for a stop on the north side of Prospect Road at Midpoint Drive.

• Schedule – No schedule issues were observed.

• Route Connections – This route is interlined with Route 17 at Sharp Point/Midpoint. It also has timed connections with Routes 5, 8, 9 and 14 at the DTC. Due to schedule variations, Route 18 has only limited connectivity here to Routes 1 and 15. An additional untimed transfer with Route 5 occurs at Prospect Road and Lemay Avenue.

• PSD Connections – Route 18 provides service to Centennial High School and Lesher Junior High School.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – There are no major on‐time issues for this route. The 44‐minute layover time (37% of the 120‐minute interlined cycle time) is a bit excessive.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 18 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #18‐ Prospect/Whedbee Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Route 18 has shown steady gains since its implementation in April 2007. Weekday boardings have increased 54% from the last half of 2007 to the first half of 2008, and Saturday boardings have increased 56% in that time.

Route 18 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

300 Weekday Saturday

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on Route 18 are primarily adults, who make up over half of the passengers on this route. Transfers account for about 11% of ridership, slightly higher than Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 18 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 18% 22%

Systemwide

6% 17% 23%

23% 37% 53%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 18 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #18‐ Prospect/Whedbee

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • About a third of boardings and alightings happen at DTC, with another 14% occurring at the eastern terminus at Midpoint & Prospect Parkway. • The next highest activity stop is at Prospect & Prospect Parkway, which had 12% of the activity. The three stops along Olive account for 14% of ridership. The deviation to EPIC only adds 2% to the ridership totals. • Ridership is steady throughout the day, with am afternoon peak in the westbound direction at 2PM.

Route 18 Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

25 Eastbound

20 Westbound

15

10 Boardings

5

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM 7 PM Start of Trip

*Portions of the first trip and last trip of the day were not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 18 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #18‐ Prospect/Whedbee

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 18 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #18‐ Prospect/Whedbee

Route 18 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Eastbound)

100 10 Average Load 90 9 Boardings 80 Alightings 8 70 7 Load

60 6 Alightings

& 50 5 Vehicle 40 4 30 3 Boardings 20 2 Average 10 1 0 0

B B B B B B B EB EB SB SB E SB E EB EB S N S SB N NB N DTC T T N T D S ST ST ST ST S O VE C CT R CT TY N Y BEE S A CENTER T N O R D T Y N IN WAY TON S R A R PARKWAY K R HE ERI ICE E PEC R BER TOVER M & S COU ING TE L LAURLEL W S LE & & O MARCH PA MIDPOINT E & LIZABETH & ROBE R & ER & P MU & E & VE VE P M CT & & & D A REM & ST TH RD R POOL A & DR RI PE & ST T E PROSPECT T A S ST ECT IDE D & IVE N L OS ET ECT P SI R & R EE IZABE R D OI P RE SP VERS E RD P R & PARKWAY T OLIVE DB EL EDORA IV T P D S E PROS RI ‐ R IN T R E WHEDBEE STOVER PRO PROSPECT AR D WH PO H T EPIC P S OLIV PROSPECT AR PROSPECT SH MIDPOIN IDPOIN M

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 18 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #18‐ Prospect/Whedbee

Route 18 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Westbound)

120 Average Load 12 Boardings 100 Alightings 10 Load 80 8 Alightings

&

60 6 Vehicle

40 4 Average Boardings

20 2

0 0 B B B B SB B NB N NB N W NB WB W WB W WB WB WB NB T TER T H ET E DTC N CT CT N C ST ST T E N AVE RD R O LIV Y CE KE TREET T T O ERIN E RIN A S S DPOI IC E T LCH LA STOVER IZABE L Y STREET NG & I & LA E PECT I M ADEM & & P W & S & EL M N C L E & URE & A AVE V & BERR RE SO Y A LA AD PRO ST LA L A A & POO & RD O & & M D R & E MU E W R DE E T PETERSON RD CT ST B EE & LIV ORA RSI E ELIZABETH D R T & O PARK ECT D CT SPECT P T RIVERSIDE E IVE E O S S EE ‐ R O WHE R REET PR PR EE ST T PECT ROSP PIC ROSP STOVER B S P E P ED EE E ROS H B LIV P W O WHED

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Route 18 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #18‐ Prospect/Whedbee Route FOX – FoxTrot FoxTrot operates between the South Transit Center and Orchard Shopping Center in Loveland via College/US 287.

Transit Centers Major Destinations South Transit Center Foothills Mall COLT North Transfer Station Target (Orchards Shopping Center) Wal‐Mart Orchards Shopping Center

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008) CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 6:17 am‐7:11 pm 6:17 am‐7:11 pm 6:17 am‐7:11 pm 6:17 am‐7:11 pm Frequency (min): 60 60 60 60 Cycle Time (min): 60 60 60 60 Layover Time (min): 12 12 12 12 Total One‐Way Trips: 25 25 25 25 Daily Rev‐Hours: 12.80 12.80 12.80 12.80 Daily Rev‐Miles: 218.66 218.66 218.66 218.66 Peak Buses: 1 1 1 1 FY 2008 Route Service Productivity and Rankings* CSU IN‐SESSION CSU OUT OF SESSION

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Avg. Daily Boardings: 321 255 371 227

Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Hr: 25.1 19.9 29.0 17.7 Ranking (8) (5) (3) (3) Pass./Rev. Veh.‐Mi: 1.5 1.2 1.7 1.0 Ranking (14) (8) (7) (8) Pass./Trip: 12.4 9.8 14.3 8.7 Ranking (8) (4) (3) (3) * In‐session statistics are averaged from September‐November 2007 and February‐April 2008. Out of session statistics are averaged from July 2007 and June 2008. Rankings are out of 16 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is in‐session, and 14 weekday and 13 Saturday routes when CSU is out of session.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins FoxTrot – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #FOX‐ FoxTrot Description of Existing Alignment

FoxTrot travels south from the South Transit Center to Orchards Shopping Center to meet City of Loveland Transit (COLT) routes. From South Transit Center, the route travels south on College Avenue/US287, where it proves service to major commercial centers between Horsetooth and Harmony, as well as single family and multi‐family neighborhoods. FoxTrot deviates east on 65th Street to provide access to the Wal‐Mart before returning south on US 287 and into the Orchards Shopping Center in Loveland at 29th Street, where it meets the COLT routes.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment –FoxTrot is a direct route providing a north‐south connection between the cities of Fort Collins and Loveland. A deviation occurs at 65th Street in order to provide a stop for the Wal‐Mart Shopping Center.

• Stops – Transfort operators noted that the deviation for the Wal‐Mart stop added time to the route; however, traffic speeds on US 287 require the bus to exit in order to stop. Stops are spaced very close on this route between Horsetooth and Harmony given the regional nature of this route.

• Schedule – FoxTrot operates at 60‐minute frequencies Monday through Saturday, year round. There are scheduling conflicts with connections on both ends of the route, which proves challenging for the large number of riders who endure one or more transfers on Transfort and COLT to make their trip. Transfort operators suggested the need for more frequent service on this route.

• Route Connections – This route is scheduled for timed transfers with 5, 6, 7 and 16 at the STC, and can make untimed transfers with Route 1. An additional untimed transfer to Route 6 occurs at College Avenue and Horsetooth Road. On the southern end, FoxTrot provides timed transfers to COLT’s Blue, Green, and Orange routes at Orchards Shopping Center; however, several factors make it difficult for FoxTrot to make this meet. These include having to hold at STC for late‐arriving routes and COLT’s very tight layovers, in addition to traffic congestion and bicycle loading time.

• PSD Connections – FoxTrot does not provide direct service to PSD schools.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Congestion between the South Transit Center and Harmony Road, bicycle loading time, and waiting for late routes at STC all cause run time delays on FoxTrot. Given these circumstances, the layover time of 12‐minutes (20% of the 60‐minute cycle time) is not always sufficient.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins FoxTrot – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #FOX‐ FoxTrot Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Weekday ridership seems independent of the CSU schedule, and appears to be trending upward over the last six months..

FoxTrot Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

500 Weekday Saturday 400

300

200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Riders on the FoxTrot are primarily youths and adults, who make up 38% and 37% of passengers on this route, respectively. CSU students and staff only make up 5% of the riders. Transfers account for about 17% of ridership, well above Transfort’s average transfer rate of 8%. The figure below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

FoxTrot Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled 20%

38% Systemwide

17% 23%

5% 23% 37% 37%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins FoxTrot – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #FOX‐ FoxTrot

Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • A graph showing unadjusted weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by time of day; • A map that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • Over half of the ridership activity on FoxTrot occurs at one of the route ends, with 25% at STC and 32% at Orchard Shopping Center. This leads to steady loads across the length of the route. • After the transit centers, stops at College & Horsetooth, College & Trilby, and Wal‐Mart are the highest generators, with about 4‐6% each of total route ridership. • Ridership is lower in the mornings and then gains in the afternoon from 1PM all the way to 7PM. The predominant pattern seems to be northbound trips occurring from 1PM to 5PM with returning southbound trips between 3PM and 7PM.

FoxTrot Weekday Ridership by Time of Day and Direction

35 Northbound 30 Southbound 25

20

15 Boardings

10

5

0 6 AM 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5 PM 6 PM 7 PM Start of Trip

*The first trip of the day was not counted.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins FoxTrot – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #FOX‐ FoxTrot

Transfort/City of Fort Collins FoxTrot – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #FOX‐ FoxTrot

FoxTrot Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Northbound)

130 13 120 Average Load 12 110 Boardings 11 100 Alightings 10

90 9 Load

80 8 Alightings 70 7 &

60 6 Vehicle 50 5 40 4 Boardings

30 3 Average 20 2 10 1 0 0

B B B B B B B NB NB N NB NB NB NB N N N NB NB N N N TR t K C E th th ET s Y EK 7th 2nd E 71 IER LB E ITY) AL OF) NG CENTER 3 4 50 57 R T WAY R C MAN S I & C T ( & & BCON & & ST TRI T O FUN & SKY UI RDW TH LD H 287 E & SSIL C A O E KN 287 287 N SHOPP I 65T S AV TROU BO & US US U PI AV FO & TO RE SHOPPING RF & E & (CIR & A D AL GE N RSE A GARFIELD G LE V AV & A E AV O FIEL 287 7 E H SQU COL G AR US 28 COLLEG LEG & HE G S LE T OL GE ORCHARDS U C COLLEGE COL LE COL COLLEGE&PAVILIO

Transfort/City of Fort Collins FoxTrot – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #FOX‐ FoxTrot

Route FOX Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Southbound)

120 Average Load 12 110 Boardings 11 100 Alightings 10 90 9 Load 80 8 Alightings

70 7 & Vehicle

60 6 50 5 40 4 Average Boardings 30 3 20 2 10 1 0 0

B SB B B B B B B B S SB SB SB ) S SB S SB S S S SB S SB S CTR R D K T N SB AY R ET h th th th AL OF) GE OF) ILBY 0 5 7 EGE R W R 71st RE 57t 5 4 41st 3 CENTER W (N A (S T & & CR D T Y & ST & & & ( SKY & RPENTE 7 & COLBOAR AR CAMERO & E th 8 LD LD SHOPPING E G CA 5 IELD E E E & BO MON & 6 F R R G & US287 & US2 A LLEGE & 7 ARFI ARFIELD ARFI SHOPPING U HA LLE 7 GAR G G G CO TROUTMAN OUTMAN COLLE 28 28 N SQ R & OLLEGE CO LLEGE & T E C US E COLLEGE O & G US TH C E G OLLE C ORCHARDS COLLEGE OLLE C

Transfort/City of Fort Collins FoxTrot – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #FOX‐ FoxTrot Route 91 – Lincoln Jr. H.S. Route 91 make one trip that travels west on Vine to Lincoln Jr HS, south on Taft Hill and east on LaPorte to the Downtown Transit Center.

Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Center Downtown Fort Collins Lincoln Jr HS

Route 92 – Poudre H.S. Route 92 makes one trip westbound on LaPorte from the DTC to Poudre High and one return trip back to the DTC.

Transit Centers Major Destinations Downtown Transit Center Downtown Fort Collins Poudre HS

Current Operations & Service Requirements (August 2008)* ROUTE 91 ROUTE 92 Route 91

Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Hours of Operation: 2:35 pm‐2:50 pm n/a 3:05 pm‐3:18 pm n/a Frequency (min): n/a n/a n/a n/a Cycle Time (min): 30 n/a 30 n/a Layover Time (min): n/a n/a n/a n/a Total One‐Way Trips: 1 n/a 2 n/a Daily Rev‐Hours: 0.3 n/a 0.47 n/a Daily Rev‐Miles: 3.64 n/a 4.69 n/a Peak Buses: 1 n/a 1 n/a * These routes operate only when PSD is in‐session and utilize the same bus.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 1 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S. Description of Existing Alignment

Routes 91 and 92 provide complementary service to Route 9. Route 91 travels west on Vine Drive, serve Lincoln Jr. High School and the Boys/Girls Club, continues east on Vine Drive, south on Taft Hill Road, and east on LaPorte Avenue providing service to the Downtown Transit Center. Route 92 travels west on LaPorte Avenue to serve Poudre High School and returns east to the downtown Transit Center.

Key Route Issues and Observations • Alignment – Both alignments are fairly direct connections between the schools and DTC.

• Stops – No stop issues were detected on these routes.

• Schedule – No schedule issues were detected on these routes.

• Route Connections – The route has untimed transfer meets with Routes 1, 5, 8, 9, 14, 15, and 18.

• PSD Connections – Route 91 provides service to Lincoln Junior High School. Route 92 provides service to Poudre High School.

• Cycle, Run, and Layover Times – Routes 91 and 92 operate once daily; therefore, no major issues were observed. The routes share the same bus, with 15‐minutes of layover at DTC between operations of the two routes.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 2 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S. Historical Ridership Characteristics

Average daily ridership by month from July 2007 to June 2008 is presented in the figure below. Routes 91 and 92 only provide one and two trips respectively when PSD is in session.

Route 91 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

40 Weekday

30

20

10

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Route 92 Monthly Average Daily Ridership Levels (July 2007 to June 2008)

30 Weekday

20

10

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 3 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S. Routes 91 and 92 are almost entirely youth fares as they are designed to serve PSD schools. The figures below shows ridership by fare class compared to systemwide averages.

Route 91 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

1% 1% Youth CSU Adult

Senior/ Other Disabled

Systemwide

17% 23%

23% 37% 98%

Route 92 Ridership by Fare Class (July 2007 to June 2008)

1% Youth CSU Adult 1% 1% Senior/ Other Disabled

Systemwide

17% 23%

23% 37% 97%

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 4 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S. Current Ridership Characteristics

A ridecheck survey was completed on April 30, 2008, when CSU was in‐session. Passenger boardings and alightings were recorded at every stop on about 85% of systemwide bus trips. Stop data was factored up by average daily ridership by route reported for April 2008 in order to approximate a 100% ridecheck. The following survey results are presented below: • Maps that illustrates total adjusted weekday ridership activity by stop; and • Graphs that depict adjusted weekday boarding and alighting activity by stop, by direction, along with average daily line loads.

Ride Check Observations • These routes both do well as single trippers, carrying daily loads of about 20 riders between the schools and DTC. • Despite being identified as a bi‐directional route, Route 92 is essentially a one‐way route from school to DTC. Only one rider used the route on the reverse trip on the ride check day.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 5 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 6 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S. Route 91 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads

30 30 Average Load Boardings 25 Alightings 25

20 20 Load

Alightings

&

15 15 Vehicle Average Boardings 10 10

5 5

0 0 VINE & HANNA LINCOLN JR HS LANCER & VINE LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & DTC (W OF) WB WB (N OF) SB GRANDVIEW EB BRYAN EB LYONS (W OF) JAMITH EB SHIELDS EB WASHINGTON LOOMIS EB EB EB

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 7 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 8 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S.

Route 92 Total Weekday Ridership by Stop and Average Line Loads (Eastbound)

30 30

Average Load Boardings 25 25 Alightings

20 20 Load

Alightings

&

15 15 Vehicle

Boardings

10 10 Average

5 5

0 0 IMPALA & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & LAPORTE & DTC LAPORTE (PVHS) IMPALA EB GRANDVIEW EB BRYAN EB LYONS (W OF) JAMITH EB SHIELDS EB WASHINGTON LOOMIS EB SHERWOOD EB SB EB EB

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Routes 91/92 – Page 9 Route Profile Transit Strategic Plan #91/92‐ Lincoln Jr. H.S./Poudre H.S.

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Appendix C

Stakeholder Meeting List

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Stakeholder Meeting List

Financial Advisory Committee Meetings: • 09/25/08 • 01/08/09 • 10/09/08 • 01/22/09 • 10/23/08 • 02/05/09 • 11/06/08 • 02/19/09 • 11/20/08 • 03/12/09

Board/Stakeholder Meetings: • 10/01/08- Public Transit Action Group • 11/13/08- Transit Advisory Group • 10/16/08- Larimer County Mobility Council • 12/02/08- UniverCity Transit and Mobility Group • 01/07/09- Economic Advisory Board • 01/26/09- Air Quality Advisory Board • 02/10/09- Council Work Session • 01/26/09- Development Lead Team • 03/12/09- Commission on Disability • 03/18/09- Transportation Board • 03/28/09- Associated Students of Colorado State University Senate Meeting • 04/01/09- Economic Advisory Board • 04/01/09- Senior Advisory Board • 04/08/09- PTAG • 04/09/09- Commission on Disability • 04/09/09- Transit Advisory Group • 04/15/09- Transportation Board • 04/15/09- Natural Resources Advisory Board • 04/16/09- Larimer County Mobility Council • 04/20/09- Air Quality Advisory Board • 05/06/09- Economic Advisory Board • 05/06/09- Youth Advisory Board • 05/12/09- Council Work Session • 5/15/09- Chamber of Commerce

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

August 2009

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Appendix D

Public Comments

August 2009

Comment From Positive Feedback Service Areas Frequency/Hours How to Encourage Ridership Partnerships PSD Regional General Comments/ Suggestions Connections FC Pub Mtg #1 I do not use the system, but I came to provide input about some friends that use it think it wanting to have service for works very well. children to and from a charcer school, TPAAK (TR Paul Academeny of Arts and Knowledge) NE Corner of Harmony and McMurry. Board President, Barry Eastman, 970- 481-8337, [email protected] FC Pub Mtg #1 The current Transfort system Gaps in service exist for youth and Keep gas prices high. More Collaboration between all Transporting children and youth Healthier Communities Coalition enthusiastically seems to meet the needs of families. Rural areas are frequency in route times and transit providers is key! to/from nonschool hour activities, supports this trategic plan & out-of-the-box thinking to riders who live along the routes underserved/not served. expansion of service area. where they're supervised & kept address our community's transportation challenges. & students seem to use the safe, is a gap in our community. It's very exciting to see the Cities of Fort Collins and COLT system. The current transportation Loveland and the Poudre School District take bold systems are limited. steps in collaborating! Way to go! FC Pub Mtg #1 CSU student service Easy and simply to use, design Should be easy to use and understand grid routes. traffic systems around bus so Routes named for streets, "The Shields Route," "The that the bus becomes the most Harmony Route," etc. convenient mode FC Pub Mtg #1 The buses run. Unserved areas- Super target, south needs to turn into the grid and run communication, public meetings on 17 go on Timberline & go to Horsetooth, turn East Lemay from Harmony, West from routes faster to Ziegler, go on Ziegler and cross Harmony and do Shields and Harmony to Taft the rest that is already present. On 5 northbound cross Mulberry and have a stop on Walmart

FC Pub Mtg #1 Level of service provided to Increased Service to N. College move to the grid system, Increase Transit validation system (give Re-engage talks RTA talks with emphasis on transit. CSU students would be nice to headways to 10 mins along those who go shopping a free Create TOD Overlay zones for all enhance corridors. see the same commitment to enhanced corridors. Increase ride home) create fare free Expand Mason Corridor North. life long residents hours to meet bar hours zones especially on weekends. FC Pub Mtg #1 air conditioning, dry expand system to city limits, 2150 Maid change to a grid system less time going from point A to adjust cost to match rider's resources Marian Ct./ Timberline & Mountain point B, current roues take Vista Dr. near Budweiser longer than walking FC Pub Mtg #1 modify current models and anticipate a significant amount of the concept of a thanks for the opportunity to contribute to this project growth for services. information is currently available regional service regading our transit, however, partnership and how about a detailed primer on coordination, "How to get from point A to B on especially including all systems? Using transit is truly the school system foreign to most residents. has potential to strongly leverage funding and service to the public. FC Pub Mtg #1 no service in my part of S. Ft. Collins more routes- 2 miles to the give me some service, even once or twice an hour (1703 Fossil Creek 80528) nearest stop means I use my would work- as a senior citizen I will have to leave if car- Always my area (south east) does not get public transportation. FC Pub Mtg #1 Frequency of Rt. #1, few big buses going frequently on it's almost impossible for me to Streets one way alternately in town, the middle land connection to Lov., more major grid- small buses/vans that do more than 2 things (go 2 for cars going through, each side divided into 2-3 drivers are announcing stops "wander" neighborhoods so a places or more) by bus without lanes that work in the small vehicles that people use (intersections), reasonable person doesn't have to walk 1/2 taking 1/2 day. The hourly to get around town. "elevated train" down the middle costs (passes) mile to catch a bus schedule can pop into 3-4 hours of I-25 very easy when you have to make connections FC Pub Mtg #1 service to CSU, route 1 grid system: increased hours & frequent, convenient, and seem to serve well but efficiencies regional service Consider that 1 parking structure which costs in the frequency with time of real arrival reliable service and collaboration needed south to Longmont, neighborhood of $20 million would double Transfort's and departure info. Expand hours and East between operating budget. Timnath and Windsor

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Page 1 Public Comments Transit Strategic Plan Comment From Positive Feedback Service Areas Frequency/Hours How to Encourage Ridership Partnerships PSD Regional General Comments/ Suggestions Connections FC Pub Mtg #1 a) Bicycles allowed on and in Current circuitous route to EPIC ought Fox Trot ought to have more a) More space for bicycles Not well for Ridgeview Classical • Change concept of funding: pool the resources of Fox Trot: Thank You! to be part of rectangular grid system. frequent service during peak during rush hour on the Fox Trot School students who live in either School Buses, Transfort, Colt, etc. b) Smaller Fox Trot bus Only if you live in a few spots in Fort hours: 6am-8:30am and 3:30 pm- or Fort Collins or Loveland. RCS is a • South Transit Center ought to be near Harmony and “kneels” making loading of Collins does it make sense to use the 8:00pm. Fox Trot ought to leave b) Change the IMAGE of a bus Charter School of the Poudre College bicycle easier bus to get to EPIC. See long term Loveland at 6:30am, connect with rider: The paying bus rider has School District. Since school • During Rush Hour: c) #5 travels from South solution at the end of this list. the #5 at 7am, and arrive at a job or attends college. The districts are not required by law to - Smaller buses run East-West on Harmony, Transit Center to intersection Lemay & Stuart at 7:15am. Fox business person wears clothes provide transportation for Charter Horsetooth, Drake, Prospect, Mulberry, Riverside, of Lemay and Stuart Trot ought to run a small bus/van suitable for the workplace and Schools, there is no bus service at Vine, etc. These run at 10 minute intervals. (use the d) Fox Trot drivers genially after the evening rush hour for two does not want to sit on seats TCS at Lemay and Stuart. school buses, and school bus drivers). accommodate bicycles on bus. additional runs. Fox Trot does not where others put their shoes Currently 10 out of the 40 - Similarly, at 10 minute intervals buses run North- Passengers also do so. currently need the new long bus anymore than a business person Loveland families who attend RCS South on Timberline, Lemay, College, Shields, Taft midday. It ought to save fuel by would sit on the sidewalk or would use the bus to transport Hill, and Overland. using the long one only during other walkway. The paying bus their children to school IF they - Junior High and High School students can get a bit peak hours. Transfort: Fort Collins rider often chooses to ride the could arrive at RCS on time. If the of exercise and safely walk a few blocks. to Greeley? Fox Trot already bus because he/she is Fox Trout left Loveland at 6:30am - This way anyone in Fort Collins can quickly and goes to Loveland, Loveland Colt environmentally conscious, and the #5 left the STC at 7:00am, easily get anywhere in less than an hour! ought to go directly (not the ecologically sensible, or for all these students could arrive at • Worry about “off the grid” spots like the Senior round-a-bout route) to Loveland personal health reasons. Such RCS at 7:15 and be on time for Center when it is not Rush hour. Senior classes do East Transit Center and connect people would not choose to school. Additonally, those RCS not begin before 9am. to Xpress-34 heading to Greeley. subject themselves to the students who last school year put second hand cigarette smoke their bikes on the bus in order to that is currently a pervasive dash from the STC to arrive at menace at the Transit Centers. RCS on time could leave their A simple “No Smoking Within 20 bikes at home and allow adults to Feet of Bus Stop” sign and take bikes on the bus. Those 10 campaign would help change families previously drove the kids the atmosphere. to school, then Mom drove home. Afternoon, Mom again drove to school to pick up the kids, and a fourth trip of the day to return home. (continued) If only 10 of the 40 families rode • New South Transit Center: please do not line buses the bus that reults in: 40 fewer up against the building as in the current setting. The trips/cars (per day!) on Hwy. 287, cigarette smoke gets trapped between the buses and which results in that much less the buildings. Patrons are forced to inhale the pollution, that much fuel second hand smoke. Students are forced into close conserved and a bus company proximity of others’ foul language. that is increasing its public • Certain bus drivers are skilled at setting the tone service. and behavior standards of the bus. I have seen one driver walk to the rear of the bus and greet the unruly teens with hellos and how was your day, while the kids kept their feet off the seats and knew they could not get away with foul language that day. I have heard other drivers tell the rear seat passengers via the PA system to clean up their language or leave the bus. I have observed a driver tell 2 passengers who may have been about to start a fight to leave the bus. They did. One tried to reboard later, he was not allowed to. These drivers could mentor the others re: these difficult situations.

FC Pub Mtg #1 We have noticed that, over the course of the summer, more and more bicyclists are riding the Foxtrot to Fort Collins, to the extent that some are being turned away. This is not a very big deal in summer, but when school starts, it will be a disaster for those of us who live in Loveland but go to school in Fort Collins. The school we attend is a charter school and thus is not requried to provide bus service to its students. Neither driving nor moving nor changing schools are options, so we are left with an increasingly unreliable means of transportation. Since school for us starts at 7:30, taking the #5 from the STC is not an option.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Page 2 Public Comments Transit Strategic Plan Comment From Positive Feedback Service Areas Frequency/Hours How to Encourage Ridership Partnerships PSD Regional General Comments/ Suggestions Connections (continued) Thus, it would help at least 10 families whose students attend Ridgeview Classical Schools but live in Loveland if the bus schedule were changed so that the #5 route arrived at the corner of Stuart and Lemay at 7:15, rather than 7:35 or later. In addition, the schedule of the Foxtrot would have to be altered to account for the difference. These famileis would then be able to take the bus and keep that many more cars off the roads, saving money and the environment. I can be reached at [email protected] FC Pub Mtg #1 runs pretty much on time, I have started using Route 6 to I like the idea of a grid system if it can serve m ost buses are clea, Downtown and get to work. If it ran every 1/2 major N-S and E-W arterials in F.C. i.e. Shield and CSU Transit Centers are great hour instead of every hour, I Taft Hill as well as College, Lemay, Timberline. The would probably use it 4 days/ west side of town seems kind of underserved except week instead of 1 or 2. Hourly for areas closest to campus. service just doesn't give me enough flexibility in my schedule- if I can't make it out the door by 7:30 am, I'd have to wait until 8:30 FC Pub Mtg #1 connecting routes 16-17-18 to the Northside Aztlan Center- there accessability are a lot of activities always going on there. S. Shields & Trilby Road, S. Lemay & Trilby Road. FC Pub Mtg #1 when developing routes, need access #7- Have routes on the hour and neet to be able to meet and to lower income housing areas. We 30 minutes later- 7:30 am, 7 am catch connecting points need to help thses people be able to could catch the bus work and earn a living. FC Pub Mtg #1 Would appreciate service to Medical Center of the Rockies.

FC Pub Mtg #1 Bull Run- housing complex- low need a low cost/low income dial- more connections Disabled flowks that need Pt emplyment because of income, high density and just outside a-ride fee option,j between Longmont SS constraints- most nights and weekends without dial-ride, need to be included, would communicating the culture of the & Ft. Collins bus service like transfort to cover city limits and service/marketing is important- throughout the day, should service annexted land, like the consistency (like hop, skip, would like RT small roads on maps jump) visually cohesive, reward between Ft. riders and attract new riders, Collins, Loveland, people don’t carry cash, should Greely, good for have cc options regional connections FC Pub Mtg #1 need service near Trilby & Timberline would like to make branding and PTAG- Aug. 13th 6:30- like the regional marketing a bigger focus of this 8:00 at HR buildign on approach study, or of Transfort Mason in Community Room, Barrier Busters- get info. To them to distribute to the group FC Pub Mtg #1 Route 8 should be more frequent cater more to elderly and United Way- what benefit Route 16 @ Snow Mesa stop hard to access, and both directions, Route 7 disabled, marketing of bus could Transfort provide Harmony is hard to cross on foot remove 30 min in summer and agency who administer keep the 60 min route, extended the low income program service hours, route on Riverside, trolley running more frequently FC Pub Mtg #1 extend Harmony route to HP gate, expand and increase frequency of ridership enforcement issues, connections to schools key, serve integrate bikes into bus system Timeberline heavily used/ south city rd foxtrot, Rt 16- make daily, not drivers how to work with kids public charter schools, into Loveland, S. city Rd 9, Re- Saturday only coordination between PSD & examine S. Boundaries (Trilby) Lack of Charter school, Thompson SD vs. s/w along Timberline, connections to PSD- sharing boundaries bus stops, need stop on Trilby and/or timberline FC Pub Mtg #1 Transfort has provided good route near Budweiser would be good Sunday service for Dial-a-Ride educate public about availability Many Centerra require percent of Mason St. Corridor is affordable image regarding and allow for dial-a-Ride service to be would be valuable especially for of Transit and hours of service, employees come housing development and accessible, Mason must professionalism and on-time added, closest route to mountain vista getting to church, need to reduce there are options for wheel chair from Ft. Collins, interact will with grid system, concern that Mason schedule is route 8, Riverside Dr. btwn Lemay transfers, especially to medical positions on buses that do not connections to only accommodate N-S needsalt. fuels should be and Prospect shows up with high facilities (takes 3 transfers from require strapdown, Transfort centerra would be considered density and could use transit service Eliz. And Taft to PVH- two hour marketing could be improved- good, Transit trip), late night service might be not being pitched as smarter connections to used very well and encourage way to go, but more needs Berthoud? ridership based, perception of transit is critical.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Page 3 Public Comments Transit Strategic Plan Comment From Positive Feedback Service Areas Frequency/Hours How to Encourage Ridership Partnerships PSD Regional General Comments/ Suggestions Connections FC Pub Mtg #1 route 7 is very circuitious, Drake needs need foxtrot and route 5 to need to promote transit culture can school buses and city buses bikes on buses are becoming more popular, a lot of grid service provide access to work on time, among students at young age, be coordinated better? Must be bikes on Fox trot, peak bus routes are getting employers on Porspect/Lemay no smoking within 200 feet of grid. Some H.S. students choice overcrowded, Foxtrot could get by with smaller bus and Stuart/Lemay need the bus stop, need to change the into Fort Collins schools and use during mid-day? Or use small bus all day and connection to occur 15 minutes image of using the bus FoxTrot. supplemental large bus during peak hours. earlier, could use more frequent service on Fox Trot. Longer bus may not work when school starts, Loveland bus system does not get people around queickly enough to key destinations FC Pub Mtg #1 keep school start times in mind Mason street should extend to old Walmart at when setting schedules, Harmony as key transfer area, would like to know Ridgeview charter school is key percentage of bus riders that use bike as part of trip. destination for Route 5 trips How will future increases in fuel propogate into the originating from Loveland. trans. Planning field? Investments into roadway improvements need to be strongly considered so they are not at the expense of needed transit investments FC Pub Mtg #1 F.R. Campus opening @ Centerra, service in the evening- what will it branding/ marketing (hop, skip, FoxTrot at capacity consultants- who was selected? More bike racks. extend dial-a-ride service area, extend cost? 30 minute headways on jump), enforce existing policies, Takes too long. 16 &17 FoxTrot, add Sunday, more routes easier maps, less complex, during summer, night drivers help elderly/disabled, be more respectful, lower cost on senior/disabled annual FC Pub Mtg #1 Route 8- both directions, Lemay vine Loveland earlier- more frequent, 5 treat kids with respect, bike Fox is full two street, connect 8 to 5, Mason Corridor- 15 minutes ealier connect with fox lockers, times each day- North, map of affordable housing trot morning and afternoon FC Pub Mtg #1 Bull Run, Vine-Timberline, can't get Mason Connectivity, 10 minute presentation on the into town to work, low socio-economic hour to provide process update, concern over loss of area needs transit, service down to N/S connectivity during the transition phase. Lemay and Trilby FC Pub Mtg #1 Drivers are courteous Mulberry/I-25; Loveland airport area; Have routes run every half hour; Easier-to-read maps/schedules; more bike racks, esp. at DTC are usually bikes &knowledgable re:other routes; NW Ft. Collins/LaPorte area; West increased service b/tw Ft. Collins more bike racks both on bus and locked everywhere. Also, the ability for busses to drivers are helpful to clients; Loveland; expand service area to &Loveland; extend service hours at transit ctr. And stops, carry more than 3 bikes at a time while running the busses are clean; recently include out near airport to include later evening hours and increased frequency of routes; route, improve safety of stops where needed, esp. expanded routes (esp. Sundays; include some "straight extended hours/days; offer "free stop on west side of 287/Skyway. Very close to Harmony corridor) are helpful; shot" runs from N. to S. College ride" days to draw new riders, 2877, no bench or shelter and difficult to access, esp. busses typically stay on w/o excessive stops; more shelters @stops; increase in snow., increase # of routes that run almost the schedule, Rarely late lighting at sops for safety entirety of a main route as opposed to routes that cover portions of the roads and then turn off of the main route causing increased transfers and travel time for many FC Pub Mtg #1 Hours need to be extended With the biggest ridership Easy transfers, Need to get rid of Fixed Route of Transfort in the city, Service and provide dial-a-ride service to whole why isn't CSU a community utilizing GPS and Dispatch participant in this Plan? Loveland Open House The interaction with the 34-Express stop at Rehab Center in More disability services are More frequency of routes and # #1 College and City - also a better Johnstown. Increased frequency (30 needed. A growing population of of routes in the communities. parnership with the human minutes headways) Reverse routes. elderly/disabled are coming. More regional connective services program. Interaction Expansion of services in more areas of services Loveland to Longmont with the City of Loveland/City Ft. Collins. Each system is doing the to Denver. Ft. Collins to of Fort Collins. tip of the iceberg in service. Longomont to Denver. More education of the servicse. Loveland Open House Good coverage of most areas. Definitely regional esrvice coordination. SE Fort Collins, quick trip More efficient routes, more They seem to do a good job going I have tidden the bus between Ft. Collins and #1 I live in NW Ft. Collins and work in between Orchards & 8th St. in buses on key routes, focus on to all the schools. Loveland and have had problems because there was downtown Loveland. If I took a bus Loveland (it's hard to have to go key areas rather than trying to no communication between the FoxTrot and Colt. from hone to work it takes two hours all the way out east or west to go go everywhere with one route. The time I am thinking of - It was a snow storm and and 4 buses each way. I would love to south and north). the Foxtrot was running late. They told me they had ride buses to other towns besides no way of knowing if the Colt had come or not and Loveland. I would really love to be that they couldn't contact them to know if I should able to go al lthe way to Denver. wait at the stop for a couple minutes or go inside King Soopers for an hour for the next bus. I ended up walking from 29th-8th and got there before the next bus even came.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Page 4 Public Comments Transit Strategic Plan Comment From Positive Feedback Service Areas Frequency/Hours How to Encourage Ridership Partnerships PSD Regional General Comments/ Suggestions Connections Loveland Open House • 1hr. between cycles too long #1 • Connections are there w/ no wait times between busses • 2 hrs. Lake to FRCC (15 min. car ride) • Long to go to Greeley • Need connection to senior services/housing • 34 Express – needs to stop at Rehab center. • No central communication between Foxtrot and Colt. • More effective regional connections, higher frequencies • Move transit center closer to downtown (centralized) • Increase headways • Increase peak hour frequency • Loise Clark has done a great job! • Transfers between 6 and Foxtrot – Foxtrot would not hold for 6 • Call out stops • Female drivers have been using the 5 min window for their personal needs Spanish Comments • Helping us to go to work • It needs frequently routes • My suggestion is to run more buses (CORE Center) • Youth to go to school • I need Transfort for Saturday • I will Transfort every 30 minutes Consolidated • To go out to recreate and Sunday • It so nice to know that you care about the people, • To save gas • Late schedules/ night and it is a very good project • Using Transfort for • More buses to run every hour • More buses and longer schedules emergency • Need more bus stops • Congratulation! I like that you are doing this project • Transfort is a necessity for • Need a bus stop by Hickory • Need a bus to CORE to participate in the classes me because my mom does not village office drive and we use Transfort a • Need buses every 30 minutes lot • Need Sunday transportation • It is very beneficial for us and very economic • We need Transfort very much TSP Website • Easy transfers. Hours need to be extended. With the biggest ridership • Need to get rid of Fixed Route Service and provide Comments • Please consider adding a northern of Transfort in the city, dial-a-ride service to whole community utilizing GPS route: Hwy 1/Douglas Rd/North Shields why isn't CSU a and Dispatch street. There are lots of residential participant in this Plan? • Is transfort info available in spanish? If not, is this a neighborhoods up there, the Art342 possibility? It would be extremely helpful for families project, etc. and students. Also, if the info is already in spanish, • Please consider adding a route along how can we get the info out to families in a more Harmony which does not require effective manner? changing busses. It would be a huge boon to FRCC, and would encourage bus use for those living west of College who would like to use public transit to reach all the new shopping, etc. at the east end of Harmony. Undoubtedly there are quite a few employees at all the new stores at the east end who would also use the bus to go to work if it weren't so awkward to cross town. TSP Website • It would be nice to have a bus that I attended the open house/feedback session in Comments Cont. runs down Harmony road from Loveland and realized I forgot to bring up one of my Johnson's corner to the transportation concerns. I live in Fort Collins and work in Loveland. I center by I-25. This would enable forgot to also bring up the issue of bus passes. I can't people to get to the Mason corridor as get a bus pass that would cover my whole commute. I well as get to I-25 for car poooling. start out on Fort Collins busses on the way to work Also, it seems that there is a lot of and Loveland busses on the way home. I can get growth on the east side of Harmony. I transfers between the services but not a pass that would be happy to visit those works on both. businesses but the commute in my own car down Harmony with traffic makes it not worthwhile. Road the bus today but had to drive to a bus stop. If we had a Harmony bus I wouldn't have to drive.

Transfort has strange routes and times, to say the least. I live near City Park.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Page 5 Public Comments Transit Strategic Plan Comment From Positive Feedback Service Areas Frequency/Hours How to Encourage Ridership Partnerships PSD Regional General Comments/ Suggestions Connections • Living near Taft and Mulberry and working at Timberline and Horsetooth, it takes me over an hour to get to work by bus which is just too much for that trip. Otherwise, I'd take the bus probably on a regular basis at least in the Winter. It seems to simple to overlook, but as the city of Fort Collins in on mile grid street system, how about buses that run along East-West & North-South main streets (Overland, Shields, Laporte, Mulberry etc. ) ? Your greatest distance to a route would be 1/2 mile and you could connect to the perpendicular direction at every major intersection. I think this "ease of use" could increase ridership as well as efficiency. I'm just looking for a way to ride the bus reasonably. 2x+ the travel time just doesn't do it. TSP Website My grandson is attending Polaris Jr. Comments Cont. High (Mountain View) this year. Polaris is a choice school and so there is no Poudre school district bus. He gets out of school at 3:10pm. There are two buses (9 and 92) that run in the afternoon BUT there are no buses that he can take in the morning to get to school unless he catches the 9 and rides to the downtown transit center and all the way around to his school. Why don't routes 91 and 92 run in the morning for Poudre High and Polaris??

I work at CSU, I have to walk quite a distance to catch the 4 bus at City Park and Mulberry. HOWEVER, the #4 route STOPS running at 4:00!!! Why? TSP Website The people who take the 4 in the Comments Cont. morning need to get home after work in the afternoon. Why not run until at least 6:00???

Why isn't there a bus route that runs up and down Shields? There should be one from Vine to the Community College on Harmony.

Why are many of the bus stops so far apart?

I think there would be more people willing to take the bus if there were better routes.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Page 6 Public Comments Transit Strategic Plan

Comment From Do proposed Transfort Are there any critical gaps in Of the proposed local Which regional connections Do future proposed services Which Funding options would General Comments/Suggestions improvements address proposed services or key concepts (Loveland and Fort should be implemented first? address important access you support? important needs? Explain. transit markets not served? Collins), what specific needs to/from Poudre School improvements would you make district High Schools? the highest priority? Yes, expanded routes and hours Improved operating hours and Fort Collins to Loveland Increased sales tax or .25 cents A transit system more like what is found in are badly needed for the Fort service to Old Town would be and pull funding away from Ram Boulder that allows for ease of movement at Collins and CSU community. extremely beneficial Ride since that wouldn't be as any time of day or night. Especially between They don't completely solve the badly needed if bus service was Old Town and College areas would cut down problem, but they help. better. on drunk driving/biking and make the costly and inefficient Ram Ride program less necessary. Extending hours would also cut down on the amount of students who drive to late classes, labs and study sessions. For the safety and security of the community. Bus service hours/Routes must be extended. Reducing omissions and putting money in the pockets of students. Yes. However, needs a change I think the gaps exist in: 1- A Transit Connection to RTD Connection to RTD No relevant opinion Utility sur-charge. However, it For Low cost passes. I would rather see the with time. Access to services- Financial should start as a voluntary way to pilot on electric charges increased, before a Barriers. 2- Integrating pay for a pass. Once it is flat 5% be imposed on the entitle bill, Transit with other commerce. mandatory, all rate payers should be eligible. Routes and hours need to be High School doesn't need many All of them, even lobbying to Fort Collins has no transportation for late extended, maybe 1-2 24 hour buses. 95% of all students over drain money from Ram Ride to night use. Ram Ride is basically a student buses. 16 own a car. get extra 24 hr. buses. taxi service. Only 1 bus would need to be running after 6:45 pm. It could only run from Taft/Elizabeth and Old Town in between. This would cover so many transporation issues for students. This system would cut down on student DUI's. If the system were to be implemented and the Fort Collins Government was really concerned about their citizens instead of revenue. Yes. The proposed I Didn't notice any gaps in the Phase 3, for me is the most Longmont and Boulder improvements do address proposals given. important. As a student without a connections should be made first. important needs. Many students car and not from Ft. Collins, the The service now doesn't go that use the bus system already. extended regional service, would far south. With this improvement, However, many more would use allow me to go home more often. I would be able to commute it the Strategic improvements Also, the extended hours are a between home and school. were implemented. great relief, because a lot of my Saving gas. classes are later in the day. I believe that the extended hours Not that I'm aware of I would consider Phase 3, the Boulder and Longmont Routes and extended routes are highest priority because being a should be implemented first, extremely important in a college college student with no car, it since RTD services are so readily town. Trying to encourage public would be very helpful to get available in those towns. transportation. It's hard to "Dump home through the proposed the Pump" with such a limited Regional Routes to Boulder. It's service. very incontinent to constantly have to drive from Ft. Collins to the Metro Area. Yes. However, the maps are a Needs to be a little more detailed Longmont From what I can tell. All of them depending on future little too veg to tell long term. to sure. detail. • Need to extend hours of 17, 15, 19, 5 routes until 9 pm and run 7 days a week • Expand service to connect to Denver • Expand to Boulder • Will ride BRT and any connections to Denver • Need to connect to RTD • Loves Transfort Service

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Page 7 Public Comments Transit Strategic Plan Comment From Do proposed Transfort Are there any critical gaps in Of the proposed local Which regional connections Do future proposed services Which Funding options would General Comments/Suggestions improvements address proposed services or key concepts (Loveland and Fort should be implemented first? address important access you support? important needs? Explain. transit markets not served? Collins), what specific needs to/from Poudre School improvements would you make district High Schools? the highest priority? • Extend hours • 7 Days per week • Connections to Denver • Community based funding • Green Pricing • Lower passes to encourage purchase • Voluntary utility fees • More voluntary to mandatory program for utility fees • Tie bus passes to discounts on other amenities/services to encourage people to buy passes • Need later night service for CSU students. •Climate Action Plan Goal - specific weight reduction per phase. • Need to sync Route 19 - All year schedule to Routes 6 & 7 - now requires 1/2 hr wait at CSU Transit Center.

Transfort/City of Fort Collins Page 8 Public Comments Transit Strategic Plan

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Appendix E

Service Statistics for Phased Improvements

August 2009

TRANSFORT BUS OPERATING STATISTICS - PHASE 1 SERVICE PLAN

Local Service Weekdays Service Frequency Peak Period One-Way Average Weekday Rnd Peak Base Early Eve Late Eve. Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Peak Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses Buses MAX A Mason Express N 10 10 15 30 180 19 12 24% 50 5.0 57.0 75.5 900.0 5.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 Local 2 Elizabeth/Prospect N 30 30 60 n/a 54 20 5 11% 45 4.0 18.0 20.3 216.0 1.50 1.50 0.75 0.00 5 LeMay/Horsetooth N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 5.8 10.4 12.5 145.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 6 Taft Hill/Horsetooth N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 35 20 22% 90 7.5 14.6 18.8 187.5 1.50 1.50 0.00 0.00 7 Centre Pkwy/Drake/Stover N 30 30 60 n/a 54 32 11 15% 75 7.1 28.8 33.8 383.4 2.50 2.50 1.25 0.00 8 N. College/Blue Spruce/Conifer Y 30 30 n/a n/a 25 27 3 10% 30 6.0 11.3 12.5 150.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 9 Vine/LaPorte (counterclockwise) Y 60 60 n/a n/a 13 25 5 17% 30 6.8 5.4 6.5 88.4 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 10 East Drake N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 23 14 23% 60 4.7 9.6 12.5 117.5 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 12 East Horsetooth N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 22 16 27% 60 4.5 9.2 12.5 112.5 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 14 East Mullberry N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 6.0 10.4 12.5 150.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 16 Harmony N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 4.6 10.4 12.5 115.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 17 Timberline/Harmony N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 27 6 10% 60 9.0 11.3 12.5 225.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 18 Whedbee/Prospect N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 21 18 30% 60 5.7 8.8 12.5 142.5 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 19 Shields N 30 30 n/a n/a 50 25 10 17% 60 5.8 20.8 25.0 290.0 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 CSU 2T Route 2 Elizabeth Trippers N 60 n/a n/a n/a 12 20 20 33% 60 4.0 4.0 6.0 48.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22 Rams Village Y 20 30 n/a n/a 27 20 0 0% 20 2.7 9.0 11.0 72.9 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 22T Rams Village Trippers Y 20 n/a n/a n/a 12 20 0 0% 20 2.7 4.0 4.0 32.4 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23 Prospect/Stuart Y 30 30 n/a n/a 22 25 5 17% 30 5.1 9.2 11.0 112.2 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 PSD 91 Lincoln Jr. High Y n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 30 n/a n/a 30 3.5 0.5 0.5 3.5 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 92 Poudre High School Y n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 30 n/a n/a 30 2.5 0.5 0.5 2.5 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00

TOTALS 651 253.1 312.8 3,494.3 26.00 23.00 5.00 2.00 Interlines: Routes 2 & 7 at CSU Transit Center Routes 5 & 9 at DTC Routes 5 & 6 at Foothills Routes 17 & 18 at Midpoint and Sharp Point Routes 10 & 12 at Foothills

Saturdays Service Frequency Off-Peak Period One-Way Average Saturday Late Eve. Rnd Base Early Eve Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses MAX A Mason Express N 15 30 30 122 19 22 37% 60 5.0 38.6 61.0 610.0 4.00 2.00 2.00 Local 2 Elizabeth/Prospect N 30 60 n/a 54 20 5 11% 45 4.0 18.0 20.3 216.0 1.50 0.75 0.00 5 Lemay/Horsetooth N 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 5.8 10.4 12.5 145.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 6 Taft Hill/Horsetooth N 60 n/a n/a 25 35 20 22% 90 7.5 14.6 18.8 187.5 1.50 0.00 0.00 7 Centre Pkwy/Drake/Stover N 30 60 n/a 54 32 11 15% 75 7.1 28.8 33.8 383.4 2.50 1.25 0.00 8 N. College/Blue Spruce/Conifer Y 30 n/a n/a 25 27 3 10% 30 6.0 11.3 12.5 150.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 9 Vine/LaPorte (counterclockwise) Y 60 n/a n/a 13 23 7 23% 30 6.8 5.0 6.5 88.4 0.50 0.00 0.00 10 East Drake N 60 n/a n/a 25 23 14 23% 60 4.7 9.6 12.5 117.5 1.00 0.00 0.00 12 East Horsetooth N 60 n/a n/a 25 22 16 27% 60 4.5 9.2 12.5 112.5 1.00 0.00 0.00 14 Mulberry N 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 6.0 10.4 12.5 150.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 17 Timberline/Harmony N 60 n/a n/a 25 27 6 10% 60 9.0 11.3 12.5 225.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 18 Whedbee/Prospect N 60 n/a n/a 25 21 18 30% 60 5.7 8.8 12.5 142.5 1.00 0.00 0.00 19 Shields N 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 5.8 10.4 12.5 145.0 1.00 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 468 186.3 240.3 2,672.8 18.00 4.00 2.00 Interlines: Routes 2 & 7 at CTC Routes 5 & 9 at DTC Routes 5 & 6 at Foothills Routes 17 & 18 at Midpoint and Sharp Point Routes 10 & 12 at Foothills

Regional Service Weekdays Service Frequency Peak Period One-Way Average Weekday Rnd Peak Base Early Eve Late Eve. Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Peak Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses Buses

Fox Foxtrot - STC to Loveland N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 24 12 20% 60 7.1 10.0 12.5 177.5 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00

TOTALS 25 10.0 12.5 177.5 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00

Saturdays Service Frequency Off-Peak Period One-Way Average Saturday Late Eve. Rnd Base Early Eve Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses

Fox Foxtrot - STC to Orchards Ctr. N 60 n/a n/a 25 24 12 20% 60 7.1 10.0 12.5 177.5 1.00 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 25 10.0 12.5 177.5 1.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSFORT BUS OPERATING STATISTICS - PHASE 2 SERVICE PLAN Local Service Weekday Service Frequency Peak Period One-Way Average Weekday Rnd Peak Base Early Eve Late Eve. Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Peak Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses Buses MAX A Mason Express N 10 10 15 30 180 19 12 24% 50 5.0 57.0 75.5 900.0 5.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 Local 1 Taft Hill N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 45 30 25% 120 9.6 18.8 25.0 240.0 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2 North College/Wilcox/Conifer Y 30 30 n/a n/a 25 40 20 33% 60 8.7 16.7 25.0 217.5 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 3 Shields N 30 30 60 n/a 54 25 10 17% 60 5.8 22.5 27.0 313.2 2.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 4 LaPorte N 30 30 n/a n/a 50 15 0 0% 30 3.6 12.5 12.5 180.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 5 Loomis/Centre/J.F. Kennedy N 30 30 60 n/a 54 35 20 22% 90 7.5 31.5 41.5 405.0 3.00 3.00 2.00 0.00 6 East Mulberry N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 6.0 10.4 12.5 150.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 7 Whedbee/Stover/J.F. Kennedy N 30 30 60 n/a 54 28 4 7% 60 6.6 25.2 27.0 356.4 2.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 8 Prospect N 30 60 60 n/a 42 26 8 13% 60 6.1 18.2 21.0 256.2 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 9 Lemay N 60 60 60 n/a 29 45 30 25% 120 9.5 21.8 29.0 275.5 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 10 Drake N 30 60 60 n/a 42 27 6 10% 60 6.5 18.9 21.0 273.0 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 11 Trilbey/Timberline N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 45 30 25% 120 10.1 18.8 25.0 252.5 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 12 Horsetooth N 30 60 60 n/a 42 35 20 22% 90 7.8 24.5 35.5 327.6 3.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 16 Elizabeth/Prospect N 30 30 30 60 65 20 20 33% 60 4.0 21.7 32.5 260.0 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 18a Harmony/Park-and-Ride N 60 60 60 n/a 29 23 14 23% 60 5.1 11.1 14.5 147.9 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 18b Harmony/Fossil Ridge HS N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 23 14 23% 60 5.0 9.6 12.5 125.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 CSU 16T Route 16 Elizabeth Trippers N 60 n/a n/a n/a 12 20 20 33% 60 4.0 4.0 6.0 48.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21 Mullberry/Laurel Y 30 60 n/a n/a 16 28 2 7% 30 3.5 7.5 8.0 56.0 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 22 Rams Village Y 20 30 n/a n/a 27 20 0 0% 20 2.7 9.0 11.0 72.9 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 22T Rams Village Trippers Y 30 n/a n/a n/a 12 20 10 33% 30 2.7 4.0 6.0 32.4 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23 Prospect/Stuart Y 30 60 n/a n/a 16 25 5 17% 30 5.1 6.7 8.0 81.6 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.00

TOTALS 849 370.1 476.0 4,970.7 38.00 32.00 16.00 3.00 Interlines: Routes 2 & 4 at DTC Routes 8 & 10 at Overland Routes 5 & 7 at DTC & STC Routes 21 & 23 at CSU Transit Center

Saturday Service Frequency Off-Peak Period One-Way Average Saturday Late Eve. Rnd Base Early Eve Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses MAX A Mason Corridor Express N 15 30 30 122 19 22 37% 60 5.0 38.6 61.0 610.0 4.00 2.00 2.00 Local 1 Taft Hill N 60 n/a n/a 25 45 30 25% 120 9.6 18.8 25.0 240.0 2.00 0.00 0.00 2 North College/Wilcox/Conifer Y 60 n/a n/a 13 40 20 33% 60 8.7 8.7 13.0 113.1 1.00 0.00 0.00 3 Shields N 60 60 n/a 29 25 10 17% 60 5.8 12.1 14.5 168.2 1.00 1.00 0.00 4 LaPorte N 45 n/a n/a 33 15 15 33% 45 3.6 8.3 12.4 118.8 1.00 0.00 0.00 5 Loomis/Centre/J.F. Kennedy N 30 60 n/a 54 35 20 22% 90 7.5 31.5 41.5 405.0 3.00 2.00 0.00 6 East Mulberry N 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 6.0 10.4 12.5 150.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 7 Whedbee/Stover/J.F. Kennedy N 30 60 n/a 54 28 4 7% 60 6.6 25.2 27.0 356.4 2.00 1.00 0.00 8 Prospect N 60 60 n/a 29 26 8 13% 60 6.1 12.6 14.5 176.9 1.00 1.00 0.00 9 Lemay N 60 60 n/a 29 45 30 25% 120 9.5 21.8 29.0 275.5 2.00 2.00 0.00 10 Drake N 60 60 n/a 29 27 6 10% 60 6.5 13.1 14.5 188.5 1.00 1.00 0.00 11 Trilbey/Timberline N 60 n/a n/a 25 45 30 25% 120 10.1 18.8 25.0 252.5 2.00 0.00 0.00 12 Horsetooth N 60 60 n/a 29 35 50 42% 120 7.8 16.9 29.0 226.2 2.00 2.00 0.00 16 Elizabeth/Prospect N 30 60 60 61 20 20 33% 60 4.0 20.3 30.5 244.0 2.00 1.00 1.00 18a Harmony/Park-and-Ride N 60 60 n/a 29 23 14 23% 60 5.1 11.1 14.5 147.9 1.00 1.00 0.00 18b Harmony/Fossil Ridge HS N 60 n/a n/a 25 23 14 23% 60 5.0 9.6 12.5 125.0 1.00 0.00 0.00

TOTALS 611 277.6 376.4 3,798.0 27.00 14.00 3.00 Interlines: Routes 8 & 10 at Overland Routes 5 & 7 at DTC & STC

Regional Services Weekday Service Frequency Peak Period One-Way Average Weekday Rnd Peak Base Early Eve Late Eve. Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Peak Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses Buses

51 Foxtrot - Fort Collins to Loveland N 30 60 60 60 49 24 12 20% 60 7.1 19.6 24.5 347.9 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 52 STC-HTC-Loveland-Denver N 2 rnd trips n/a n/a n/a 8 90 0 0% 180 66.5 12.0 12.0 532.0 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

TOTALS 57 31.6 36.5 879.9 4.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Saturday Service Frequency Off-Peak Period One-Way Average Saturday Late Eve. Rnd Base Early Eve Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses

51 FoxTrot to Loveland N 60 60 60 36 24 12 20% 60 7.1 14.4 18.0 255.6 1.00 1.00 1.00

TOTALS 36 14.4 18.0 255.6 1.00 1.00 1.00 TRANSFORT BUS OPERATING STATISTICS - PHASE 3 SERVICE PLAN Local Service Weekday Service Frequency Peak Period One-Way Average Weekday Rnd Peak Base Early Eve Late Eve. Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Peak Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses Buses MAX A Mason Express N 10 10 15 30 180 19 12 24% 50 5.0 57.0 75.5 900.0 5.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 B Elizabeth/DTC Express N 30 30 30 60 65 20 20 33% 60 4.2 21.7 32.5 273.0 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 C Elizabeth/STC Express N 30 30 30 60 65 30 0 0% 60 6.8 32.5 32.5 442.0 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 Local 1 Taft Hill N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 45 30 25% 120 9.6 18.8 25.0 240.0 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2 North College/Mountain Vista N 30 30 n/a n/a 50 28 19 25% 75 6.8 23.3 31.3 340.0 2.50 2.50 0.00 0.00 3 Shields N 30 30 60 n/a 54 25 10 17% 60 5.8 22.5 27.0 313.2 2.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 4 LaPorte N 30 30 n/a n/a 50 15 15 33% 45 3.6 12.5 18.8 180.0 1.50 1.50 0.00 0.00 5 Loomis/Centre/J.F. Kennedy N 30 30 60 n/a 54 35 20 22% 90 7.5 31.5 41.5 405.0 3.00 3.00 2.00 0.00 6 East Mulberry N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 6.0 10.4 12.5 150.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 7 Whedbee/Stover/J.F. Kennedy N 30 30 60 n/a 54 28 4 7% 60 6.6 25.2 27.0 356.4 2.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 8 Prospect N 30 30 60 n/a 54 26 8 13% 60 6.1 23.4 27.0 329.4 2.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 9 Lemay N 60 60 60 n/a 29 45 30 25% 120 9.5 21.8 29.0 275.5 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 10 Drake N 30 30 60 n/a 54 27 6 10% 60 6.5 24.3 27.0 351.0 2.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 11 Trilbey/Timberline N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 45 30 25% 120 10.1 18.8 25.0 252.5 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 12 Horsetooth N 30 30 60 n/a 54 35 20 22% 90 7.8 31.5 41.5 421.2 3.00 3.00 2.00 0.00 18a Harmony/Park-and-Ride N 60 60 60 n/a 29 23 14 23% 60 5.1 11.1 14.5 147.9 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 18b Harmony/Fossil Ridge HS N 60 60 n/a n/a 25 23 14 23% 60 5.0 9.6 12.5 125.0 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 CSU 21 Mullberry/Laurel Y 30 60 n/a n/a 16 28 2 7% 30 3.5 7.5 8.0 56.0 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 22 Rams Village Y 20 30 n/a n/a 27 20 10 33% 30 2.7 9.0 13.5 72.9 1.50 1.00 0.00 0.00 22T Rams Village Trippers Y 20 n/a n/a n/a 12 20 10 33% 30 2.7 4.0 6.0 32.4 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 23 Prospect/Stuart Y 30 60 n/a n/a 16 25 5 17% 30 5.1 6.7 8.0 81.6 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.00

TOTALS 963 422.9 535.5 5745.0 41.0 38.0 18.0 4.0 Interlines: Routes 2 & 4 at DTC Routes 8 & 10 at Overland Routes 5 & 7 at DTC & STC Routes 21 & 23 at CSU Transit Center MAX Routes B & C at Overland

Saturday Service Frequency Off-Peak Period One-Way Average Saturday Late Eve. Rnd Base Early Eve Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses MAX A Mason Corridor Express N 15 30 30 122 19 22 37% 60 5.0 38.6 61.0 610.0 4.00 2.00 2.00 B Elizabeth/DTC Express N 30 60 60 61 20 20 33% 60 4.2 20.3 30.5 256.2 2.00 1.00 1.00 C Elizabeth/STC Express N 30 60 60 61 30 0 0% 60 6.8 30.5 30.5 414.8 2.00 1.00 1.00 Local 1 Taft Hill N 60 n/a n/a 25 45 30 25% 120 9.6 18.8 25.0 240.0 2.00 0.00 0.00 2 North College/Mountain Vista Y 60 n/a n/a 13 40 20 33% 60 8.7 8.7 13.0 113.1 1.00 0.00 0.00 3 Shields N 30 60 n/a 54 25 10 17% 60 5.8 22.5 27.0 313.2 2.00 1.00 0.00 4 LaPorte N 45 n/a n/a 33 15 15 33% 45 3.6 8.3 12.4 118.8 1.00 0.00 0.00 5 Loomis/Centre/J.F. Kennedy N 60 60 n/a 29 35 50 42% 120 7.5 16.9 29.0 217.5 2.00 2.00 0.00 6 East Mulberry N 60 n/a n/a 25 25 10 17% 60 6.0 10.4 12.5 150.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 7 Whedbee/Stover/J.F. Kennedy N 60 60 n/a 29 28 4 7% 60 6.6 13.5 14.5 191.4 1.00 1.00 0.00 8 Prospect N 60 60 n/a 29 26 8 13% 60 6.1 12.6 14.5 176.9 1.00 1.00 0.00 9 Lemay N 60 60 n/a 29 45 30 25% 120 9.5 21.8 29.0 275.5 2.00 2.00 0.00 10 Drake N 60 60 n/a 29 27 6 10% 60 6.5 13.1 14.5 188.5 1.00 1.00 0.00 11 Trilbey/Timberline N 60 n/a n/a 25 45 30 25% 120 10.1 18.8 25.0 252.5 2.00 0.00 0.00 12 Horsetooth N 60 60 n/a 29 35 50 42% 120 7.8 16.9 29.0 226.2 2.00 2.00 0.00 18a Harmony/Park-and-Ride N 60 60 n/a 29 23 14 23% 60 5.1 11.1 14.5 147.9 1.00 1.00 0.00 18b Harmony/Fossil Ridge HS N 60 n/a n/a 25 23 14 23% 60 5.0 9.6 12.5 125.0 1.00 0.00 0.00

TOTALS 647 292.2 394.4 4017.5 28.0 15.0 4.0 Interlines: Routes 8 & 10 at Overland Routes 5 & 7 at DTC & STC MAX Routes B & C at Overland Sunday Freq./Trips Off-Peak Period One-Way Average Sunday Rnd Base Base Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses MAX A Mason Corridor Express N 30 44 19 22 37% 60 5.0 13.9 22.0 220.0 2.00 B Elizabeth/DTC Express N 60 22 20 20 33% 60 4.2 7.3 11.0 92.4 1.00 Local 3 Shields N 60 22 25 10 17% 60 5.8 9.2 11.0 127.6 1.00 8 Prospect N 60 22 26 8 13% 60 6.1 9.5 11.0 134.2 1.00 10 Drake N 60 22 27 6 10% 60 6.5 9.9 11.0 143.0 1.00 12 Horsetooth N 60 22 35 50 42% 120 7.8 12.8 22.0 171.6 2.00 18a Harmony/Park-and-Ride N 60 22 23 14 23% 60 5.1 8.4 11.0 112.2 1.00

TOTALS 71.1 99.0 1001.0 9.0 Interlines: Routes 8 & 10 at Overland

Regional Service Weekday Service Frequency Peak Period One-Way Average Weekday Rnd Peak Base Early Eve Late Eve. Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Peak Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses Buses

51 Foxtrot - FC/Loveland/Longmont N 30 60 60 60 49 66 48 27% 180 26.5 53.9 73.5 1298.5 6.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 52 STC-HTC-Loveland-Denver N 2 rnd trips n/a n/a n/a 8 90 0 0% 180 66.5 12.0 12.0 532.0 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53 HTC-Loveland-Longmont-Bldr N 2 rnd trips n/a n/a n/a 8 90 0 0% 180 53.5 12.0 12.0 428.0 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

TOTALS 65 77.9 97.5 2258.5 10.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Saturday Service Frequency Off-Peak Period One-Way Average Saturday Late Eve. Rnd Base Early Eve Daily Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Midday Early Eve Late Eve Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Period Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses Buses Buses

51 Foxtrot - FC/Loveland/Longmont N 60 60 60 36 66 48 27% 180 26.5 39.6 54.0 954.0 3.00 3.00 3.00

TOTALS 36 39.6 79.0 954.0 3.00 3.00 3.00

Sunday Freq./Trips Off-Peak Period One-Way Average Sunday Rnd Base Base Time Layover % Cycle Distance In-Serv. Rev. Rev. Rte. # Route Pattern Trip? Period Trips (Min.) Time Layover Time (Miles) Hours Hrs. Miles Buses

51 Foxtrot - FC/Loveland/Longmont N 60 22 66 48 27% 180 26.5 24.2 33.0 583.0 3.00

TOTALS 24.2 33.0 583.0 3.00

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Appendix F

Citizen’s Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) Correspondence

August 2009

MEMORANDUM

To: Fort Collins City Council Loveland City Council Fort Collins City Manager Loveland City Manager Poudre School District Superintendent

From: Financial Advisory Committee of the Transit Strategic Plan

Date: April 4, 2009

Committee report on funding alternatives for transit

This letter reports the findings and recommendations of the Financial Advisory Committee of the Transit Strategic Plan for the Cities of Fort Collins and Loveland and the Poudre R-1 School District. Our basic assumption in making these recommendations is that expansion of transit service will be an essential means of adapting to future, potentially, disruptive changes in energy economics, environmental policy, and community demographics.

Overview:

In the immediate time period, the advisory committee recommends establishment of a consolidated management structure for the area’s transit operations. While there are several ways to do so, a Regional Service Authority (RSA) could be created without a concurrent tax increase that would provide the platform for future funding efforts as the economy and conditions warrant. In doing so, an RSA would allow for differing levels of funding and service as each City wishes. This will be discussed in more detail below.

The advisory committee also finds that there is no one funding source likely to support the transit improvements envisioned by the Transit Strategic Plan. Instead, a combination of sources will be required. The timing of the funding will have to be informed by the timing of any improvements in the transit system. And, while this advisory committee is forecasting certain levels of support from each potential source, we recognize that further discussion and debate may result in changes to the amounts shown.

The committee was given the singular task of making funding recommendations for proposed improvements in the transit systems of Fort Collins and Loveland and better coordination with the Poudre School District. While we were briefed on the progress of developing the Transit Strategic Plan itself, and availed ourselves of those opportunities to comment, we were not charged with recommending any of the design elements, phasing, or other aspects of the plan. While the committee is supportive of improvements in the transportation system, the Transit Strategic Plan stands on its own.

1 Management Structure:

The advisory committee looked at several governance options as they might relate to funding possibilities. The three most likely candidates are:

Status quo. Each entity operates its own system, raises its own funds, and only limited intergovernmental agreements exist for routes in common such as the Foxtrot line today. The committee believes that a new approach will be needed to meet the growing needs for transit in the area.

Combined efforts under an IGA. There are already ongoing discussions between the City staffs seeking to improve coordination, operations and efficiency. The Transit Strategic Plan analyzes those possibilities in more detail. While this is an improvement over doing nothing, it fails to capture the economies of scale that a true consolidation offers.

A new operational authority. The committee recommends that a Regional Service Authority (RSA), dedicated to transit with no new funding, be considered as the initial step towards an area-wide transit operation. There appear to be several advantages to this approach for the near term: • An RSA requires a vote to establish but then becomes its own legal entity for future fund raising, operations, etc. Getting public support for a consolidated effort will build knowledge and support for future growth of the system. • The RSA can be structured so that each participating entity provides its own funding and contracts with the RSA to provide transit service at whatever level it wishes. • The RSA starts with an appointed, unpaid board of directors. By contracting with the cities for all staff services, little if any resources are needed to sustain the board itself. • An RSA allows the participating cities to take best advantage of economies of scale in their transit operations. • The need for inter-city mobility and federal funding requirements already favor a consolidated transit operation across the study area. • While this recommendation speaks only to Fort Collins and Loveland, an RSA can be designed so that additional jurisdictions could join now or later. • The tight focus of an RSA on only transit service helps avoid any confusion with any other regional transportation efforts towards infrastructure.

The City Transit Staffs have more detail about this option and the requirements to establish such an authority.

Potential Revenue Sources: (See Attachment A for summary)

The committee recognizes the differences in transit philosophies between the two cities. As a result, the following discussion of possible sources of funding needs to be combined with the concept of an RSA where each city can pick and choose how it raises the funds for the amount of service it wishes to provide. However, in the interest of brevity, the numbers shown below are for combined Fort Collins and Loveland. The Transit Strategic Plan will have more individual city detail. The mission of this committee was to research how all three phases of the strategic plan could be funded – a total annual 2 need of approximately $37 million dollars by 2015. The numbers shown below illustrate at least one route to that amount. (Numbers shown are estimates and subject to further refinement.)

Attachment B of this letter lists the most promising revenue sources considered by the committee. In evaluating possible revenue streams for the strategic plan, the advisory committee used several criteria to evaluate each:

• Reliable and dedicated source • Fair: Places burden on users, but not undue burden on those least able to pay • Ease of administration and implementation • Revenue grows with the community • Ability for differentiation by community • Likely success with voters, public acceptance

In regard to the last item, likelihood of success, the advisory committee is keenly aware of the current economic situation. Timing will require careful judgment.

After reviewing a wide range of possible funding sources, the committee recommends further consideration of the revenue sources described below. These recommendations reflect the general consensus of the committee except for the Transit Utility Tax as discussed below.

Maintenance of Effort: Today both Loveland and Fort Collins are using General Fund revenues along with Federal and occasional State support to operate the current level of transit service. This report anticipates continuation of that effort. However, in packaging a suite of community improvements with a tax increase, it may prove advantageous to combine all transit funding in a common statement of need. Today, the existing sources of funding (local, state and federal) contribute $9.5 million to the transit systems. With projected volume and inflationary increases, those sources will produce $15.1 million by 2015.

Fares: A fare is the fee someone pays each time they step aboard a vehicle. It can take the form of cash; a pre-paid monthly or yearly pass (with or without a discount); a transfer from another bus; or a waiver based on some factor such as age. Typically the fare-box revenues cover 10% to 15% of the cost of operating the system. Commuters taking a lengthy inter-regional bus to work might pay most of the cost of the trip, while a fully subsidized local service that caters to tourists and shoppers might not charge at all. Too high of a fare becomes a regressive burden on the low-income transit-dependent population and discourages choice riders from giving up their alternatives, typically automobiles. As a result, setting of fares is a philosophical question regarding the overall mission of the transit system as it relates to mobility, congestion, economic development, air quality, etc. For the purposes of this study, the advisory committee recommends continuation of the existing fare levels which will grow by an additional $1million by the time the system is built out.

General Sales Tax: This has the greatest capacity to raise funds. It is also the most sought after revenue source and competition by other City needs will be intense. Any increase in the rate of sales tax, or redirection of an existing sales tax, will require a 3 public vote. The advisory committee recommends by the time of the final build out of Phase 3 of the strategic plan, $11.2 million additional dollars per year for transit should be funded by sales tax which is just over a ¼ cent tax on non-grocery sales. This would be about $11 per month per household.

Transit Utility Fee: A fee would be added each month to an existing utility bill to pay for the basic mobility service provided by the transit system. • The majority of the committee supports this approach on the belief that all members of the community receive direct and/or indirect benefits of the fully- developed transit system. The benefits apply to drivers as well as non-drivers since the reductions in congestion, improvement in air quality, etc. extend beyond the transit ridership. The fee would be applied as a flat rate for households, but may vary for businesses based on their traffic generation potential. Properly designed, a fee can be assessed by the City Council without a public vote. Up to $6.7 million dollars per year can be raised by a 5% utility fee which would cost just under $7 per month per household – or perhaps as low as $3 per month if businesses are assessed at a higher level commensurate with their traffic needs. • Two committee members do not support this approach for several reasons. For one, in difficult times like this, it is felt that citizens should vote on any fee or tax increase since many households already have to make difficult spending decisions. Also there is the concern that such a fee is not a stable resource since new councils can redirect or stop the funding. And, finally, there is a concern that assessing fees on businesses based on volume of rides generated could be subjective and place an undue burden on businesses.

Negotiated Agreements: Today the Associated Students of Colorado State University (ASCSU) pays a fee to Transfort in exchange for which all students with a current I.D. can ride any Transfort bus without paying a fare. The bus routes serving CSU are the most heavily used, and Transfort is able to share the economies back to the students with a collective fee that is much lower than if all riders paid the current fare box rates. Also, as a marketing tool, businesses are offered the opportunity to buy highly discounted annual passes for their employees. The advisory committee believes there may be a few places where special, additional service might be offered in exchange for a flat fee such as used with CSU. Following an extensive analysis of this option the committee was disappointed to find that negotiated agreements can generate no more than an additional $1 million per year, and it could be some time before that level of funding could be reached. The committee notes that the existence of an area-wide RSA would improve the ability to recruit new partners thanks to the broader service area.

Special Improvement Districts: There is already a great deal of interest in the development and business community around the Transit Oriented Development possibilities of the Mason Corridor and its Bus Rapid Transit system. Other transit corridors, such as along Harmony Road in Fort Collins are envisioned in the long-term Transit Strategic Plan. Additional revenues are possible in such a district through either an increase in property values such as the Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority, or through a tax increment financing, or even a special district sales tax. This source could ultimately have considerable potential. In the time horizon of the study, by 2015 Special Improvement Districts could generate $2 million per year of revenue.

4 Implementation:

If a Regional Service Authority is to be established, additional study will be needed with legal and operational experts to design the underlying agreements and ballot language. Then a campaign effort will be needed to present the concept and benefits to the voters. The committee recommends that other potential partners, such as Larimer County and the City of Berthoud be contacted to see if their transit operations would be candidates for inclusion.

Once the governance structure is decided, timing and approach to funding and service levels then revert to local leadership: • Transit Utility Fees, fares, and negotiated agreements are within the purview of the City Councils and thus the quickest sources to raise additional funds. • Special improvement districts typically require a vote of the property owners within the district. While these sources individually and in combination can fund a number of improvements, they are not sufficient to fund the full build out of the transit system as envisioned in the strategic plan. • Sales tax increases or redirections will require a popular vote which can be held on a city by city basis. The timing of such votes must coincide with established elections and generally require a non-governmental organization to champion and fund the campaign.

The advisory committee noted that the City of Denver successfully used a multiple choice tax referendum called “A to I” where voters could chose among several options. Knowing there are other varying calls for funding in Fort Collins, Loveland and Larimer County (police, jails, pavement, parks, mental health, etc.) structuring a common, singular campaign seems problematic across all jurisdictions. However, the concept of increased voter choice within each individual jurisdiction warrants additional study.

Justification and conclusion:

Double digit increases in transit ridership followed the spike in gasoline prices last year. In the future our communities will likely see the return of higher fuel costs, continued air quality and climate issues, increasing road congestion, and an aging population. The need for, and growing value of, mass transit options is clear.

According to the American Automobile Association, it costs a family about $500 per month to own and use an automobile. Use of a high service transit system by family members can offset the need to fuel, or even own, one or more automobiles. This can free up a considerable amount of household wealth for other needs. To a low income family that might mean the difference in finding and holding a job, or qualifying for a mortgage or educational loan. To an upper income family, elimination of the second or third family vehicle would put funds currently being exported to car manufacturers and oil companies back into the local economy.

Whatever route is pursued, improved transit service must in the end make sense to the population. Any endeavor to ask officials and voters for additional funding will have to connect the benefits of transit back to the individual.

5 The advisory committee wishes to compliment the City and School District staffs for their professionalism and dedication to their work. It has been a pleasure to work with them on this effort. Our community is already the richer for having such people in its employ.

Thank you for considering this recommendation. We will be happy to answer any questions at your convenience.

On behalf of the Financial Advisory Committee,

Gary D. Thomas 757 Cherokee Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 Home 970-482-7125 Work 970-223-8604

______Attachment A: Recommended possible revenue sources Attachment B: All revenue sources considered Attachment C: Roster of advisory committee

6

Attachment A Recommended possible revenue sources vs. needs

Phase Annual Costs Sources Revenues Balance needed 2009 Existing local and Current 9,500,000 federal funds 9,500,000 0 2015 Phase III 37,000,000 37,000,000 Maintenance of Effort 15,100,000 21,900,000 Add’l fares 1,000,000 20,900,000 ¼ + cent sales tax 11,200,000 9,700,000 5% utility fee 6,700,000 3,000,000 New negotiated agreements 1,000,000 2,000,000 Special improvement districts along corridors 2,000,000 0

Amounts shown are projected estimates including inflation.

7 Attachment B Funding Sources Considered with Strengths and Weaknesses

General Fund ƒ Has ability to raise large amounts of revenue. (sales tax) ƒ Majority of regional retailers are located in Fort Collins and Loveland. ƒ Diffuses funding burden over many people and businesses, including out-of-region visitors. ƒ Easy to administer. ƒ Represents majority of existing revenue and unable to keep pace with rising costs. ƒ Requires City Council to allocate additional funding to transit budget. ƒ Competes with other City services. ƒ Subject to changes in biennial City budget (BFO). ƒ Vulnerable to business cycles and may stagnate or decline during economic downturn. ƒ Seen as regressive but rebates possible to lessen impact.

ƒ Historically reliable source of funds. ƒ 5307 Funding is formula based, so as revenue hours increase funding increases. ƒ Generates decent revenue, but would not keep pace if system were to grow. Federal Funding ƒ Easy to administer. ƒ Federal funding is generated from national sources not just local. ƒ Mostly only available for capital assistance. ƒ Does not provide enough funding to meet capital needs. ƒ No guarantee of increased annual amounts.

ƒ Users are paying for service. ƒ Discounted pass sales has resulted in a growing segment of fare revenue and large increase in ridership. ƒ New Technology could increase fare recovery rate. Fares and Passes ƒ Represents only 5% of current operating costs. ƒ Limited in amount that can be increased due to impacts on ridership. ƒ Not keeping pace with increased operating costs. ƒ Challenging to have 100% fare recovery except on long distance lines.

ƒ Represents approximately 16% of the costs to deliver service to campus. ƒ Provides a higher revenue recovery than if we collected fares from riding students. ASCSU Agreement ƒ Contracts are negotiated regularly (strength and weakness) ƒ Easy to administer. ƒ Contracts are negotiated with students who have short term interests.

8

ƒ 20 year Contract with Next Media covers all bus stop installation costs, and generates revenue. ƒ Increased opportunities for additional advertising with new technology at stops and transit centers. ƒ Easy to administer. Advertising ƒ Funds coming through commercial advertising. ƒ Revenue represents a little over 2% of total operating costs. ƒ Growth in advertising revenue is limited to space available to advertise. ƒ Does not keep pace with increased operating costs.

ƒ Provides unexpected revenue primarily for capital needs. Misc. Grants ƒ Very unreliable.

ƒ Has ability to raise large amounts of revenue. ƒ Majority of regional retailers are located in Fort Collins and Loveland. ƒ Diffuses funding burden over many people and businesses, Sales Tax (Other than including out-of-region visitors. General Fund) ƒ Considered a regressive tax but rebates possible to lessen impact. ƒ Vulnerable to business cycles and may stagnate or decline during economic downturn.

ƒ Potential for substantial reliable revenue. ƒ Revenue will rise with rising property values. ƒ Can be imposed on those that benefit most from property value increases related to transit. ƒ Is a regressive tax, affecting lower income households more Property Tax than higher income households. ƒ Fully funded by landowners in taxing jurisdiction. ƒ Commercial landowners pay higher property tax per dollar due to Gallagher Amendment. ƒ If a district is used, could have equity arguments.

ƒ Directly tied to transportation. ƒ Assessed on motorists who contribute to congestion of roadways. ƒ Not as productive as sales or property tax. Motor Vehicle ƒ Fee is capped at $10 per registered vehicle per year. Registration Fee ƒ Similar problem as Gas Tax, as more people ride transit fewer autos are being purchased. ƒ State just added a new fee.

9

ƒ Requires new growth to “pay its own way” for transit infrastructure. ƒ Captures both residential and commercial development. ƒ Only available for capital assistance. Impact Fees ƒ Not as productive in revenue generation as sales or property tax. ƒ Must demonstrate rational nexus and rough proportionality in the fee amount.

ƒ Would provide a higher revenue recovery than if we collected fares from passengers. ƒ Would potentially increase ridership, which would in turn increase Federal funding. ƒ Could target apartment complexes, school districts, CSU admin., New Negotiated existing districts (DDA), business parks, etc. Agreements ƒ Agreements can be terminated at any time. ƒ Agreements can be renegotiated. ƒ Could increase overhead costs to manage various agreements and contracts.

Improvement ƒ See property tax. Districts ƒ Visitors, not residents, will fund improvements. ƒ Reliable revenue source. Visitor Benefit Tax ƒ Could face lodging industry opposition. ƒ Lodging industry claims high visitor benefit taxes hurt tourism.

ƒ Steady revenue stream, keeps pace with growth. ƒ Relatively easy to administer with existing utilities already in place. ƒ Relatively low revenue production with a flat fee. Transit Utility Fee ƒ Can be regressive, rebates can lessen impact on low income households.

ƒ Direct link to transportation impacts. ƒ Residents and commuters pay the fee. ƒ Employer and employee share the fee (Denver model). Head Tax Fee ƒ Potential citizen aversion to a “new” tax. ƒ Not as productive as sales or property tax.

ƒ Direct link to transportation. ƒ Residents and commuters pay the fee. ƒ Will keep pace with growth. ƒ Reliable revenue stream. Congestion Fee ƒ Exogenous benefits. ƒ Unprecedented in the United States. ƒ Upfront infrastructure investment – How do we collect this revenue? ƒ Potential adverse effects on businesses.

ƒ N/A Carbon Credits

10 Attachment C Roster of Advisory Committee

Mary Atchison Larimer County United Way, Senior Vice President for Community Investment

Donna Chapel Chapel and Collins Wealth Management, Co-Founder Board of Directors for the Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce

Dan Gould CSU Professor, Retired Former Fort Collins Transportation Board Member

Robert Heath Heath Construction, Founder

Daniel Hill Loveland Outlet Malls, General Manager Loveland Transportation Advisory Board Member

Doug Johnson UniverCity Connections, Director of Implementation

Gary Thomas SAINT, Executive Director Loveland Transportation Advisory Board, Chair Fort Collins Transportation Board, Chair

Kitty Wild Wild Real Estate Services, Broker/Owner

11

Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Transfort Technical Report

Appendix G

Financial Plan Background Information

August 2009

TSP DRAFT Funding Analysis 02/19/09 Existing Evaluation Criteria Strengths Weaknesses Governance Options Revenues ƒ Has ability to raise large amounts of ƒ Represents majority of existing revenue ƒ Operated through existing o Reliable Source revenue. and unable to keep pace with rising municipal governments o Dedicated Source ƒ Majority of regional retailers are costs. ƒ Intergovernmental o Likely Success with voters located in Fort Collins and Loveland. ƒ Requires City Council to allocate Agreements o Transparent ƒ Diffuses funding burden over many additional funding to transit budget. ƒ Special Districts Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) General Fund o people and businesses, including out- ƒ Competes with other City services. Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) (sales tax) o of-region visitors. ƒ Subject to changes in biennial City o Ease of Administration ƒ Easy to administer. budget (BFO). o Ease of implementation ƒ Vulnerable to business cycles and may o Revenue grows with the community stagnate or decline during economic o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional downturn. mechanism, but does not have to be) ƒ Historically reliable source of funds. ƒ Mostly only available for capital ƒ Existing Municipal o Reliable Source ƒ 5307 Funding is formula based, so as assistance. Government o Dedicated Source revenue hours increase funding ƒ Does not provide enough funding to ƒ RTA o Likely Success with voters increases. meet capital needs. ƒ RSA o Transparent ƒ Generates decent revenue, but would ƒ No guarantee of increased annual ƒ Special Districts o Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) Federal Funding not keep pace if system were to grow. amounts. ƒ Special Statutory Districts o Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) ƒ Easy to administer. ƒ Intergovernmental o Ease of Administration ƒ Federal funding is generated from Agreements o Ease of implementation national sources not just local. o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be) ƒ Users are paying for service. ƒ Represents only 5% of current operating ƒ Existing Municipal o Reliable Source ƒ Discounted pass sales has resulted in costs. Government o Dedicated Source a growing segment of our fare ƒ Limited in amount you can increase due ƒ RTA o Likely Success with voters revenue and large increase in to impacts on ridership. ƒ RSA o Transparent ridership. ƒ Not keeping pace with increased ƒ Special Districts Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) Fares and o ƒ New Technology could increase fare operating costs. ƒ Special Statutory Districts Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) Passes o recovery rate. ƒ Challenging to have 100% fare recovery. ƒ Intergovernmental o Ease of Administration Agreements o Ease of implementation o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be) ƒ Represents approximately 16% of the ƒ Contracts are negotiated with students ƒ Existing Municipal o Reliable Source costs to deliver service to campus. who have short term interests. Government o Dedicated Source ƒ Provides a higher revenue recovery ƒ Contracts are negotiated regularly (also ƒ RTA o Likely Success with voters than if we collected fares from riding strength) ƒ RSA o Transparent students. ƒ Special Districts Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) ASCSU o ƒ Contracts are negotiated regularly ƒ Special Statutory Districts Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) Agreement o (also weakness) ƒ Intergovernmental o Ease of Administration ƒ Easy to administer. Agreements o Ease of implementation o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be)

TSP DRAFT Funding Analysis 02/19/09

Existing Revenues Strengths Weaknesses Governance Options Evaluation Criteria (cont.) ƒ 20 year Contract with Next Media ƒ Revenue represents a little over 2% of ƒ Existing Municipal o Reliable Source covers all bus stop installation costs, total operating costs. Government o Dedicated Source and generates revenue. ƒ Growth in advertising revenue is limited ƒ RTA o Likely Success with voters ƒ Increased opportunities for additional to space available to advertise. ƒ RSA o Transparent advertising with new technology at ƒ Does not keep pace with increased ƒ Special Districts o Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) Advertising stops and transit centers. operating costs. ƒ Special Statutory Districts o Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) ƒ Easy to administer. ƒ Intergovernmental o Ease of Administration ƒ Funds coming through commercial Agreements o Ease of implementation advertising. o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be) ƒ Provides unexpected revenue ƒ Very unreliable. ƒ Existing Municipal o Reliable Source primarily for capital needs. Government o Dedicated Source ƒ RTA o Likely Success with voters ƒ RSA o Transparent ƒ Special Districts o Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) Misc. Grants ƒ Special Statutory Districts o Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) ƒ Intergovernmental o Ease of Administration Agreements o Ease of implementation o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be)

TSP DRAFT Funding Analysis 02/19/09 Potential New Strengths Weaknesses Governance Options Evaluation Criteria Revenues ƒ Has ability to raise large amounts of ƒ Considered a regressive tax. ƒ Existing Municipal o Reliable Source revenue. ƒ Vulnerable to business cycles and may Government o Dedicated Source ƒ Majority of regional retailers are stagnate or decline during economic ƒ RTA o Likely Success with voters located in Fort Collins and Loveland. downturn. ƒ RSA o Transparent Sales Tax (Other ƒ Diffuses funding burden over many ƒ Requires public vote. ƒ Special Statutory Districts o Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) than General people and businesses, including out- ƒ Intergovernmental o Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) Fund) of-region visitors. Agreements o Ease of Administration o Ease of implementation o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be) ƒ See strengths from Sales Tax. ƒ See weaknesses from Sales Tax. ƒ Existing Municipal o Reliable Source ƒ No additional tax burden on ƒ Would most likely be extremely Government o Dedicated Source residents. controversial. ƒ RTA o Likely Success with voters ƒ Generates substantial revenue. ƒ Requires public vote. ƒ RSA o Transparent ƒ Special Statutory Districts Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) Re-direct Existing o ƒ Intergovernmental Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) Sales Tax o Agreements o Ease of Administration o Ease of implementation o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be) ƒ Would provide a higher revenue ƒ Agreements can be terminated at any ƒ Existing Municipal o Reliable Source recovery than if we collected fares time. Government o Dedicated Source from passengers. ƒ Agreements can be renegotiated. ƒ RTA o Likely Success with voters ƒ Would potentially increase ridership, ƒ Could increase overhead costs to ƒ RSA o Transparent which would in turn increase Federal manage various agreements and ƒ Special Districts Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) New Negotiated o funding. contracts. ƒ Special Statutory Districts Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) Agreements o ƒ Could target apartment complexes, ƒ Intergovernmental o Ease of Administration school districts, CSU admin., existing Agreements o Ease of implementation districts (DDA), business parks, etc.. o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be) ƒ Steady revenue stream, keeps pace ƒ Relatively low revenue production with a ƒ Existing Municipal Utility o Reliable Source with growth. flat fee. o Dedicated Source ƒ Relatively easy to administer with ƒ Significantly more cost per household o Likely Success with voters existing utilities already in place. than sales tax, when compared to o Transparent ƒ Precedent has been established revenue generated. o Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) Utility Fee locally and nationally for treating o Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) Transit/Transportation as a utility. o Ease of Administration ƒ Does not require public vote, but vote o Ease of implementation of council members. o Revenue grows with the community o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be)

TSP DRAFT Funding Analysis 02/19/09

Potential New Strengths Weaknesses Governance Options Evaluation Criteria Revenues ƒ Targets specific area to receive ƒ Capital improvements only. o Reliable Source improvements of service. ƒ Requires vote of residents in district. Dedicated Source ƒ Existing Municipal o Likely Success with voters Government o Transparent ƒ RTA o Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) Improvement ƒ RSA o Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) Districts ƒ Special Districts o Ease of Administration ƒ Special Statutory Districts o Ease of implementation ƒ Intergovernmental o Revenue grows with the community Agreements o o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be) ƒ See strengths from Sales Tax. ƒ See weaknesses from Sales Tax. ƒ Would allow for comprehensive ƒ Requires public vote. o Reliable Source delivery of service to area greater o Dedicated Source than municipal boundaries. o Likely Success with voters ƒ Easier to implement compared to o Transparent statutory district. Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) ƒ RTA o RTA ƒ Governed by appointed board of Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) o directors (could also be viewed as o Ease of Administration weakness). o Ease of implementation ƒ Would provide for ease of o Revenue grows with the community administration with one primary o Differentiation by the community ( could be a funding source and transit entity. regional mechanism, but does not have to be)

ƒ See strengths from Sales Tax. ƒ See weaknesses from Sales Tax. o Reliable Source ƒ Would allow for comprehensive ƒ Requires establishment by Colorado o Dedicated Source delivery of service to area greater General Assembly. o Likely Success with voters than municipal boundaries. ƒ Governed by elected board of directors o Transparent ƒ Governed by elected board of (could also be viewed as strength). Fair (payment borne by those who benefit) Statutory District ƒ Special Statutory Districts o directors (could also be viewed as ƒ Requires public vote. Fair (no undue burden on those who can least afford) (RTD) o weakness). o Ease of Administration ƒ Would provide for ease of o Ease of implementation administration with one primary o Revenue grows with the community funding source and transit entity. o Differentiation by the community ( could be a regional mechanism, but does not have to be) Exhibit 1. Sales Tax Projections, Fort Collins and Loveland, 2008 to 2015

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

City of Fort Collins - Sales $ 2,155,214,900 $ 2,198,319,198 $ 2,242,285,582 $ 2,287,131,294 $ 2,332,873,919 $ 2,379,531,398 $ 2,427,122,026 $ 2,475,664,466

1/10 Percent $ 2,155,215 $ 2,198,319 $ 2,242,286 $ 2,287,131 $ 2,332,874 $ 2,379,531 $ 2,427,122 $ 2,475,664 1/4 Percent 5,388,037 5,495,798 5,605,714 5,717,828 5,832,185 5,948,828 6,067,805 6,189,161 1/2 Percent 10,776,075 10,991,596 11,211,428 11,435,656 11,664,370 11,897,657 12,135,610 12,378,322 3/4 Percent 16,164,112 16,487,394 16,817,142 17,153,485 17,496,554 17,846,485 18,203,415 18,567,483 1 Percent 21,552,149 21,983,192 22,422,856 22,871,313 23,328,739 23,795,314 24,271,220 24,756,645

City of Loveland - Sales $ 1,025,939,300 $ 1,046,458,086 $ 1,067,387,248 $ 1,088,734,993 $ 1,110,509,693 $ 1,132,719,886 $ 1,155,374,284 $ 1,178,481,770

1/10 Percent $ 1,025,939 $ 1,046,458 $ 1,067,387 $ 1,088,735 $ 1,110,510 $ 1,132,720 $ 1,155,374 $ 1,178,482 1/4 Percent 2,564,848 2,616,145 2,668,468 2,721,837 2,776,274 2,831,800 2,888,436 2,946,204 1/2 Percent 5,129,697 5,232,290 5,336,936 5,443,675 5,552,548 5,663,599 5,776,871 5,892,409 3/4 Percent 7,694,545 7,848,436 8,005,404 8,165,512 8,328,823 8,495,399 8,665,307 8,838,613 1 Percent 10,259,393 10,464,581 10,673,872 10,887,350 11,105,097 11,327,199 11,553,743 11,784,818

Total - Sales $ 3,181,154,200 $ 3,244,777,284 $ 3,309,672,830 $ 3,375,866,286 $ 3,443,383,612 $ 3,512,251,284 $ 3,582,496,310 $ 3,654,146,236

1/10 Percent $ 3,181,154 $ 3,244,777 $ 3,309,673 $ 3,375,866 $ 3,443,384 $ 3,512,251 $ 3,582,496 $ 3,654,146 1/4 Percent 7,952,886 8,111,943 8,274,182 8,439,666 8,608,459 8,780,628 8,956,241 9,135,366 1/2 Percent 15,905,771 16,223,886 16,548,364 16,879,331 17,216,918 17,561,256 17,912,482 18,270,731 3/4 Percent 23,858,657 24,335,830 24,822,546 25,318,997 25,825,377 26,341,885 26,868,722 27,406,097 1 Percent 31,811,542 32,447,773 33,096,728 33,758,663 34,433,836 35,122,513 35,824,963 36,541,462

Note: Base Year (2008) revenue obtained from YTD figures from December 2008 monthly sales tax reports from Ft Collins and Loveland A 2 percent compound growth rate is projected. It is roughly the rate of inflation. Exhibit 2. Revenue Available from Negotiated Agreements, 2009 - 2015

123456 Organization 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Colorado State University Students/Staff 31,260 31,260 31,260 31,260 31,260 31,260 31,260 $15 Fee $ 468,900 $ 478,278 $ 487,844 $ 497,600 $ 507,552 $ 517,703 $ 528,058 $25 Fee 781,500 797,130 813,073 829,334 845,921 862,839 880,096 $35 Fee 1,094,100 1,115,982 1,138,302 1,161,068 1,184,289 1,207,975 1,232,134 $45 Fee 1,406,700 1,434,834 1,463,531 1,492,801 1,522,657 1,553,110 1,584,173 $55 Fee 1,719,300 1,753,686 1,788,760 1,824,535 1,861,026 1,898,246 1,936,211 $65 Fee 2,031,900 2,072,538 2,113,989 2,156,269 2,199,394 2,243,382 2,288,249

Front Range Community College Students/Staff 24,653 24,653 24,653 24,653 24,653 24,653 24,653 $15 Fee $ 369,795 $ 377,191 $ 384,735 $ 392,429 $ 400,278 $ 408,284 $ 416,449 $25 Fee 616,325 628,652 641,225 654,049 667,130 680,473 694,082 $35 Fee 862,855 880,112 897,714 915,669 933,982 952,662 971,715 $45 Fee 1,109,385 1,131,573 1,154,204 1,177,288 1,200,834 1,224,851 1,249,348 $55 Fee 1,355,915 1,383,033 1,410,694 1,438,908 1,467,686 1,497,040 1,526,981 $65 Fee 1,602,445 1,634,494 1,667,184 1,700,527 1,734,538 1,769,229 1,804,613

Poudre School District Students 3,115 3,146 3,178 3,209 3,241 3,274 3,307 $15 Fee $ 46,725 $ 48,136 $ 49,590 $ 51,087 $ 52,630 $ 54,220 $ 55,857 $25 Fee 77,875 80,227 82,650 85,146 87,717 90,366 93,095 $35 Fee 109,025 112,318 115,710 119,204 122,804 126,513 130,333 $45 Fee 140,175 144,408 148,769 153,262 157,891 162,659 167,571 $55 Fee 171,325 176,499 181,829 187,321 192,978 198,806 204,809 $65 Fee 202,475 208,590 214,889 221,379 228,064 234,952 242,048

Poudre Valley Health System Staff 3,488 3,488 3,488 3,488 3,488 3,488 3,488 $15 Fee $ 52,320 $ 53,366 $ 54,434 $ 55,522 $ 56,633 $ 57,766 $ 58,921 $25 Fee 87,200 88,944 90,723 92,537 94,388 96,276 98,201 $35 Fee 122,080 124,522 127,012 129,552 132,143 134,786 137,482 $45 Fee 156,960 160,099 163,301 166,567 169,899 173,297 176,762 $55 Fee 191,840 195,677 199,590 203,582 207,654 211,807 216,043 $65 Fee 226,720 231,254 235,879 240,597 245,409 250,317 255,324

Total 62,516 62,547 62,579 62,610 62,642 62,675 62,708 $15 Fee $ 937,740 $ 956,971 $ 976,602 $ 996,640 $ 1,017,094 $ 1,037,972 $ 1,059,285 $25 Fee 1,562,900 1,594,952 1,627,670 1,661,066 1,695,156 1,729,954 1,765,475 $35 Fee 2,188,060 2,232,933 2,278,738 2,325,493 2,373,218 2,421,935 2,471,664 $45 Fee 2,813,220 2,870,914 2,929,805 2,989,919 3,051,281 3,113,917 3,177,854 $55 Fee 3,438,380 3,508,895 3,580,873 3,654,345 3,729,343 3,805,898 3,884,044 $65 Fee 4,063,540 4,146,876 4,231,941 4,318,772 4,407,405 4,497,880 4,590,234

Note: Base Year based on recently published enrollment/staffing figures A 1 percent compound growth rate is assumed for PSD students A 2 percent compound growth rate is implied for charges. It is roughly the rate of inflation. Exhibit 3. Revenue Available from a Flat Utility Fee, 2009 - 2015

123456 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

City of Fort Collins - Electric Accounts 62,000 62,620 63,246 63,879 64,517 65,163 65,814 $1 per month fee $ 744,000 $ 766,469 $ 789,616 $ 813,463 $ 838,029 $ 863,338 $ 889,410 $5 per month fee 3,720,000 3,832,344 3,948,081 4,067,313 4,190,146 4,316,688 4,447,052 $10 per month fee 7,440,000 7,664,688 7,896,162 8,134,626 8,380,291 8,633,376 8,894,104 $15 per month fee 11,160,000 11,497,032 11,844,242 12,201,938 12,570,437 12,950,064 13,341,156 $20 per month fee 14,880,000 15,329,376 15,792,323 16,269,251 16,760,583 17,266,752 17,788,208

City of Loveland - Electric Accounts 31,000 31,310 31,623 31,939 32,259 32,581 32,907 $1 per month fee $ 372,000 $ 383,234 $ 394,808 $ 406,731 $ 419,015 $ 431,669 $ 444,705 $5 per month fee 1,860,000 1,916,172 1,974,040 2,033,656 2,095,073 2,158,344 2,223,526 $10 per month fee 3,720,000 3,832,344 3,948,081 4,067,313 4,190,146 4,316,688 4,447,052 $15 per month fee 5,580,000 5,748,516 5,922,121 6,100,969 6,285,219 6,475,032 6,670,578 $20 per month fee 7,440,000 7,664,688 7,896,162 8,134,626 8,380,291 8,633,376 8,894,104

Total - Electric Accounts 93,000 93,930 94,869 95,818 96,776 97,744 98,721 $1 per month fee $ 1,116,000 $ 1,149,703 $ 1,184,424 $ 1,220,194 $ 1,257,044 $ 1,295,006 $ 1,334,116 $5 per month fee 5,580,000 5,748,516 5,922,121 6,100,969 6,285,219 6,475,032 6,670,578 $10 per month fee 11,160,000 11,497,032 11,844,242 12,201,938 12,570,437 12,950,064 13,341,156 $15 per month fee 16,740,000 17,245,548 17,766,364 18,302,908 18,855,656 19,425,096 20,011,734 $20 per month fee 22,320,000 22,994,064 23,688,485 24,403,877 25,140,874 25,900,128 26,682,312

Note: Base Year based on current number of accounts A 1 percent compound growth rate is assumed for total accounts A 2 percent compound growth rate is implied for charges. It is roughly the rate of inflation. Exhibit 4. Revenue Available from an Excise Utility Fee, 2009 - 2015

123456 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

City of Fort Collins - Utility Charge Revenue$ 83,752,596 $ 85,427,648 $ 87,136,201 $ 88,878,925 $ 90,656,503 $ 92,469,633 $ 94,319,026 1% Fee $ 837,526 $ 854,276 $ 871,362 $ 888,789 $ 906,565 $ 924,696 $ 943,190 5% Fee 4,187,630 4,271,382 4,356,810 4,443,946 4,532,825 4,623,482 4,715,951 10% Fee 8,375,260 8,542,765 8,713,620 8,887,892 9,065,650 9,246,963 9,431,903 15% Fee 12,562,889 12,814,147 13,070,430 13,331,839 13,598,476 13,870,445 14,147,854

City of Loveland - Utility Charge Revenue $ 37,431,000 $ 38,179,620 $ 38,943,212 $ 39,722,077 $ 40,516,518 $ 41,326,849 $ 42,153,386 1% Fee $ 374,310 $ 381,796 $ 389,432 $ 397,221 $ 405,165 $ 413,268 $ 421,534 5% Fee 1,871,550 1,908,981 1,947,161 1,986,104 2,025,826 2,066,342 2,107,669 10% Fee 3,743,100 3,817,962 3,894,321 3,972,208 4,051,652 4,132,685 4,215,339 15% Fee 5,614,650 5,726,943 5,841,482 5,958,311 6,077,478 6,199,027 6,323,008

Total - Utility Charge Revenue $ 121,183,596 $ 123,607,268 $ 126,079,413 $ 128,601,002 $ 131,173,022 $ 133,796,482 $ 136,472,412 1% Fee $ 1,211,836 $ 1,236,073 $ 1,260,794 $ 1,286,010 $ 1,311,730 $ 1,337,965 $ 1,364,724 5% Fee 6,059,180 6,180,363 6,303,971 6,430,050 6,558,651 6,689,824 6,823,621 10% Fee 12,118,360 12,360,727 12,607,941 12,860,100 13,117,302 13,379,648 13,647,241 15% Fee 18,177,539 18,541,090 18,911,912 19,290,150 19,675,953 20,069,472 20,470,862

Note: Base Year based on current revenue from electric utility fee revenue A 2 percent compound growth rate is projected. It is roughly the rate of inflation. Exhibit 5. Revenue Available from a Scaled Utility Fee, "Low" Scenario 2009 - 2015

Current 123456 Units/Acres 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

City of Fort Collins Residential Fee $1.53 58,129 $ 1,067,243 $ 1,088,588 $ 1,110,360 $ 1,132,567 $ 1,155,219 $ 1,178,323 $ 1,201,889 Industrial Fee $18.90 271 61,374 62,601 63,853 65,130 66,433 67,762 69,117 High Traffic Retail Fee $180.58 197 427,725 436,279 445,005 453,905 462,983 472,243 481,688 Retail Fee $74.55 812 726,258 740,783 755,599 770,711 786,125 801,847 817,884 Office/Institutional Fee $23.72 2,428 691,118 704,941 719,040 733,420 748,089 763,051 778,312 Total 2,973,718 3,033,193 3,093,857 3,155,734 3,218,848 3,283,225 3,348,890

City of Loveland Residential Fee $1.25 Industrial Fee $13.92 ** Still Need to Obtain Land Use Data ** High Traffic Retail Fee $139.24 Retail Fee $54.71 Office/Institutional Fee $18.07 Total

Note: Curent Year Housing unit data obtained from 2006 transportation utility fee study and updated with an assumed 2 percent annual growth rate A 2 percent growth rate is assumed after 2009 This fee is based Ft Collins' Transportation Utility Fee developed in 2006. This fee is not imposed currently. The City of Loveland currently imposes a "Street Maintenance Fee"; rates are shown above. Exhibit 6. Revenue Available from a Scaled Utility Fee, "Medium" Scenario 2009 - 2015

Current 123456 Units/Acres 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

City of Fort Collins Residential Fee $2.30 58,129 $ 1,600,865 $ 1,632,883 $ 1,665,540 $ 1,698,851 $ 1,732,828 $ 1,767,485 $ 1,802,834 Industrial Fee $28.35 271 92,061 93,902 95,780 97,696 99,650 101,643 103,675 High Traffic Retail Fee $270.87 197 641,587 654,419 667,507 680,857 694,474 708,364 722,531 Retail Fee $111.83 812 1,089,387 1,111,175 1,133,398 1,156,066 1,179,187 1,202,771 1,226,826 Office/Institutional Fee $35.58 2,428 1,036,678 1,057,411 1,078,559 1,100,131 1,122,133 1,144,576 1,167,467 Total 4,460,578 4,549,789 4,640,785 4,733,601 4,828,273 4,924,838 5,023,335

City of Loveland

** Still Need to Obtain Land Use Data **

Note: Curent Year Housing unit and commercial acreage data obtained from 2006 transportation utility fee study and updated with an assumed 2 percent annual growth rate A 2 percent growth rate is assumed after 2009 Medium Scenario fees are 1.5 times the low scenario Exhibit 7. Revenue Available from a Scaled Utility Fee, "High" Scenario 2009 - 2015

Current 123456 Units/Acres 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

City of Fort Collins Residential Fee $3.06 58,129 $ 2,134,487 $ 2,177,177 $ 2,220,720 $ 2,265,135 $ 2,310,437 $ 2,356,646 $ 2,403,779 Industrial Fee $37.80 271 122,748 125,203 127,707 130,261 132,866 135,523 138,234 High Traffic Retail Fee $361.16 197 855,449 872,558 890,010 907,810 925,966 944,485 963,375 Retail Fee $149.10 812 1,452,516 1,481,566 1,511,197 1,541,421 1,572,250 1,603,695 1,635,769 Office/Institutional Fee $47.44 2,428 1,382,237 1,409,882 1,438,079 1,466,841 1,496,178 1,526,101 1,556,623 Total 5,947,437 6,066,385 6,187,713 6,311,467 6,437,697 6,566,451 6,697,780

City of Loveland

** Still Need to Obtain Land Use Data **

Note: Curent Year Housing unit and commercial acreage data obtained from 2006 transportation utility fee study and updated with an assumed 2 percent annual growth rate A 2 percent growth rate is assumed after 2009 High Scenario fees are double the low scenario