DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report Merced County 2017/18 - 2021/22 Short Range Transit Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report Merced County 2017/18 - 2021/22 Short Range Transit Plan Final Report Merced County 2017/18 - 2021/22 Short Range Transit Plan Prepared for the Merced County Association of Governments Prepared by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. This page left intentionally blank. Final Report Merced County 2017/18 – 2021/22 Short Range Transit Plan _________________________ Prepared for the Merced County Association of Governments 369 West 18th Street Merced, CA 95340 Prepared by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. 2690 Lake Forest Road, Suite C P. O. Box 5875 Tahoe City, California 96145 This plan development has been financed in part through a grant from the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, and through other State and local funds made available to and through the Merced County Association of Governments.The findings and recommendations of this plan are solely those of the consultant team; they are not explicitly endorsed by Caltrans or the Federal Transit Administration. June 30, 2017 LSC #167330 This page left intentionally blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Study Setting and Public Outreach .......................................................................................................... 3 3 Existing Transit Services ........................................................................................................................ 29 4 Passenger Surveys ................................................................................................................................. 77 5 Service Alternatives Analysis ................................................................................................................. 85 6 Capital Alternatives ............................................................................................................................. 133 7 Financial Considerations .................................................................................................................... 151 8 Goals, Policies, Objectives and Performance Measures ..................................................................... 161 9 Merced County Short Range Transit Plan ........................................................................................... 167 10 Marketing Plan ................................................................................................................................... 191 Appendix A – G: Bound Separately LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 Historic and Projected Population of Merced County ............................................................................ 3 2 Merced County Population Characteristics ............................................................................................. 6 3 Population Projections by Age Groups for Merced County .................................................................. 14 4 Merced County Commute Travel Characteristics ................................................................................. 16 5 Commuters Into and Out of Merced County ........................................................................................ 17 6 Commuters from Merced County ......................................................................................................... 17 7 Top Merced County Employers ............................................................................................................. 18 8 The Bus Fares and Passes ...................................................................................................................... 40 9 TJPA Operating and Capital Revenues .................................................................................................. 42 10 TJPA Operating Expenses ...................................................................................................................... 43 11 The Bus Operating Statistics, Fiscal Year 2015‐16 ................................................................................ 45 12 The Bus Performance Indicators by Route ............................................................................................ 46 13 The Bus Ridership by Route and Year ................................................................................................... 50 14 The Bus Ridership by Route and Month, Fiscal Year 2015‐16 .............................................................. 52 15 Busiest Boarding and Alighting by Route and Stop .............................................................................. 53 Fiscal Year 2017‐18 to 2021‐22 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. Merced County Short Range Transit Plan Page i 16 Summary of Passenger Activity at Major The Bus Stops ....................................................................... 54 17 The Bus Ridership by Route and Day of the Week ................................................................................ 55 18 The Bus Average Weekday Passenger Boarding by Route by Time of Day ........................................... 60 19 Review of Weekday Ridership and Productivity ................................................................................... 62 20 The Bus Fixed Route Fleet Inventory..................................................................................................... 67 21 The Bus Paratransit Fleet Inventory ...................................................................................................... 68 22 CatTracks Service................................................................................................................................... 74 23 YARTS Ridership by Month .................................................................................................................... 75 24 Transfers To and From Surveyed Routes .............................................................................................. 78 25 Common Boarding Locations of Surveyed Passengers ......................................................................... 79 26 The Bus Service Alternatives Summary ................................................................................................. 88 27 Weekday Vs. Weekend Ridership and Service Level on Routes Serving UC Santa Cruz Campus ......... 98 28 Existing Route W2 Weekday Ridership by Run ................................................................................... 104 29 Existing Rural Lifeline Services ............................................................................................................ 111 30 Proportion of The Bus Paratransit Trip‐Ends by Distance from Nearest Fixed Route ........................ 119 31 Transit Service Alternatives Performance Analysis ............................................................................. 126 32 Merced The Bus SRTP Vehicle Needs .................................................................................................. 134 33 Percentage of September, 2016 Boardings by Fare or Pass Type by Route ....................................... 155 34 Peer System Fare and Pass Analysis .................................................................................................... 158 35 Current and Proposed Performance Standards .................................................................................. 163 36 Merced The Bus SRTP Estimated Operating Cost ............................................................................... 181 37 Merced The Bus SRTP Estimated Ridership ........................................................................................ 182 38 Merced The Bus SRTP Estimated Farebox Revenues .......................................................................... 184 39 Merced The Bus SRTP Capital Plan ...................................................................................................... 185 40 Merced The Bus SRTP Financial Plan .................................................................................................. 186 41 Merced The Bus Initiatives for Objective #1 ....................................................................................... 211 42 Merced The Bus Initiatives for Objective #2 ....................................................................................... 212 43 Merced The Bus Initiatives for Objectives #3 ...................................................................................... 213 44 Merced The Bus Initiatives for Objective #4 ....................................................................................... 213 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1 Study Location Map ................................................................................................................................ 4 2 Merced County Population Trends: 2000 to 2030 .................................................................................. 5 3 Total Population Per Square Mile ........................................................................................................... 7 4 Youth Population (Ages 10 to 17) Per Square Mile ................................................................................. 8 5 Senior Population (Ages 65 and Over) Per Square Mile ........................................................................ 10 6 Persons Living Below the Poverty Level by Census Tract ...................................................................... 11 7 Zero Vehicle Households by Census Tract............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • March 18, 2019 and Reviewed the Policies on the Agenda and Recommends Them for Approval
    806 The Board Meeting ofthe Voorhees Township Board of Education was held on Monday, March 18,2019 at 7:34 PM at the Administration Building, Bruce Karpf, Vice-President, presiding. The Voorhees Township Board ofEducation uses a Rolling Agenda concept. Items that are listedfor a vote on the public board agenda are sent to the Board ofEducation members weekly as information items. Each member has the ability to request topic to be discussed in Committee meetings as needed. 1. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice ofthis meeting pursuant to the Open Public Meetings Act has been given by the Board Secretary in the following manner: 1. Posting written notice on the official bulletin board at the Voorhees Township Public Schools Administrative Building on March 4, 2019. 2. Sending written notice to the Courier Post on March 4, 2019. 3. Filing written notice with the Clerk of Voorhees Township on March 4, 2019. II. SALlJTE TO TIlE FLAG III. ROLLCALL Present Absent Barbara Dunleavy Rachel van Aken Dana Galiano Dr. Marissa Levy Richard Nelson John Schmus Monica Watson Bruce Karpf, Vice-President Dawn Wallace, President (Arrived at 7:37 PM) Dr. Barry J. Galasso, Interim Superintendent Helen G. Haley, Business Administrator/Board Secretary Howard Mendelson, Attorney IV. 1. Motion by Dr. Levy, seconded by Mrs. Schmus, to approve the minutes ofthe meeting of February 27, 2019. Motion carried, 7 ayes. VOORHEES TOWNSHIP MARCI-I 18, 2019 807 2. Motion by Mrs. Watson, seconded by Dr. Levy, to approve the minutes of the March 11,2019 meeting and the executive session meetings of: a.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles - Glendale - Burbank Corridor Feasibility Study Final Report 21 October 2019
    Los Angeles - Glendale - Burbank Corridor Feasibility Study Final Report 21 October 2019 Prepared by: In association with: IBI Group Terry A Hayes Associates HDR Translink RSE Epic Land Solutions RSG Costin Public Outreach Group LOS ANGELES GLENDALE BURBANK CORRIDOR FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL REPORT PREPARED FOR Metro Regional Rail One Gateway Plaza Los Angeles, CA October 21, 2019 IN ASSOCIATION WITH: IBI Group HDR RSE RSG Terry A. Hayes Associates Translink Epic Land Solutions Costin Public Outreach Group Los Angeles-Glendale-Burbank Corridor Feasibility Study Final Report October 2019 This page intentionally left blank. Page ii Los Angeles-Glendale-Burbank Corridor Feasibility Study Final Report October 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................. 1 Project Purpose...................................................................................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 1 Feasibility Study Objectives ................................................................................................... 2 Study Findings ....................................................................................................................... 5 Study Resolution ...................................................................................................................10 1. INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Adopted April 8Th, 2014 by Ordinance No
    CITY OF TROUTDALE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Adopted April 8th, 2014 by Ordinance no. 820 Prepared for: Prepared by: City of Troutdale Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 219 E Historic Columbia River Highway 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Troutdale, Oregon 97060 Portland, Oregon 97205 503.665.5175 503.228.5230 www.kittelson.com Transportation System Plan Troutdale Transportation System Plan Troutdale, Oregon Prepared For: City of Troutdale 219 E Historic Columbia River Highway Troutdale, Oregon 97060 (503) 665-5175 Prepared By: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205 (503) 228-5230 Project Manager: Matt Hughart, AICP Project Principal: Mark Vandehey, P.E. Project No. 12560.0 March 2014 Table of Contents Transportation System Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1-1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 Goals and Policies ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1-2 Transportation Plans ................................................................................................................................................................ 1-3 Financing ...............................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Demand-Responsive Transportation Systems
    I ~ I CleGFi nolOiQ· U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA·TION OF THE SECRETARY I , ...~Sharing OFFICE AND URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION ~ :::0 :....­ c:, •r• C, STATE-OF-THE-ART I OVERVIEW ...c: AUGUST 1974 HE 5620 dcmand-,c,pon,iUc +P3 D45 Urnill~~[POO[I]UffiU~OO~ ~ - w•on J --- ~·~ - This document has been prepared by the Transportation Systems Center and is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Trans­ portation in the interest of information exchange. FOREWORD On March 16, 1972, the President sent a special message to Congress wherein he called "for a strong new effort to marshal! science and technology in the work of strengthening our economy and improving the quality of our life." In this message he stated that in the final analysis," the progress we seek requires a new partnership in science and technology-­ one which brings together the Federal Government, private enterprise, State and local governments, and our universities and research centers in a coordinated, cooperative effort to serve the national interest." As part of its ongoing commitment to this principle of technology-sharing, the U.S. Department of Transportation has initiated a series of publications based on research and development efforts sponsored by the Department. The series comprises technical reports, state-of-the-art documents, newsletters and bulletins, manuals and handbooks, bibliographies, and other special publications. All share a primary objective: to contri­ bute to a better base of knowledge and understanding throughout the transportation community, and, thereby, to an improvement in the basis for decision-making within the community. This title in the series presents an overview of demand responsive transportation, an innovative approach that may help fill the need for flexibility in public transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • 723-14 M34 M34a Sbs M&S Layout 1
    Bus Timetable Effective as of August 31, 2014 M34/ M34A Via 34 St M34 – between Javits Convention Center and Eastside Ferry Terminal M34A – between Waterside Plaza and Port Authority Bus Terminal If you think your bus operator deserves an Apple Award – our special recognition for service, courtesy and professionalism – call 511 and give us the badge or bus number. ¯˘¿ Fares – MetroCard® is accepted for all MTA New York City trains (including Staten Island Railway - SIR), and, local, Limited-Stop and +SelectBusService buses (at MetroCard fare collection machines). Express buses only accept 7-Day Express Bus Plus MetroCard or Pay-Per-Ride MetroCard. All of our buses and +SelectBusService Coin Fare Collector machines accept exact fare in coins. Dollar bills, pennies, and half-dollar coins are not accepted. Free Transfers – Unlimited Ride MetroCard permits free transfers to all but our express buses (between subway and local bus, local bus and local bus etc.) Pay-Per-Ride MetroCard allows one free transfer of equal or lesser value if you complete your transfer within two hours of the time you pay your full fare with the same MetroCard. If you pay your local bus fare with coins, ask for a free electronic paper transfer to use on another local bus. Reduced-Fare Benefits – You are eligible for reduced-fare benefits if you are at least 65 years of age or have a qualifying disability. Benefits are available (except on peak-hour express buses) with proper identification, including Reduced-Fare MetroCard or Medicare card (Medicaid cards do not qualify). Children – The subway, SIR, local, Limited-Stop, and +SelectBusService buses permit up to three children, 44 inches tall and under to ride free when accompanied by an adult paying full fare.
    [Show full text]
  • Greater Productivity for Intralogistics Robust Industrial Pick-To-Light Solutions Let’S Connect
    Greater productivity for intralogistics Robust industrial Pick-to-Light solutions Let’s connect. Intralogistics Increase efficiency and avoid errors Pick-to-Light and Put-to-Light Precise picking and feeding for intralogistics Solutions at a glance The acceleration of production working processes, flexible adjustments to meet Pick-to-Light (P2L) solutions are installed in the picking or withdrawal area. fluctuations in demand and the growing need for customised products are presen- The compartment displays are equipped with a digital display, a capacitive touch ting industrial companies with considerable challenges. Intralogistics in particular button with a bright multi-coloured LED, and optionally an external sensor input. is looking for solutions that increase productivity and optimize the interaction and The production information system indicates the storage location that the picker communication between all work areas. From the delivery of raw materials to final should go to through coloured illuminated LEDs. The display also shows how many assembly, all components have to reach their place of deployment more quickly, parts are to be removed. The touch button or external sensor are used to confirm more efficiently and more reliably. Our Pick-to-Light and Put-to-Light solutions that a picking step has been completed. provide valuable support for picking and assembly applications. Using light signals, they guide employees through a sequence of work steps within a picking process Put-to-Light solutions are deployed in the filling area for empty containers. that have to be confirmed successively. This approach minimizes potential sources The functionalities are analogous to those of the Pick-to-Light solution.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit & Bus Committee Meeting
    Transit & Bus Committee Meeting July 2014 Committee Members F. Ferrer, Committee Chairman J. Banks III, Committee Vice Chairman J. Ballan S. Metzger J. Kay A. Albert C. Moerdler A. Cappelli J. Molloy E. Watt Transit & Bus Committee Meeting 347 Madison Ave. - 5th Floor Board Room New York, NY 10017 Monday, 7/28/2014 9:30 - 10:30 AM ET 1. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JUNE 23, 2014 June Committee Meeting Minutes - Page 4 3. COMMITTEE WORK PLAN Committee Work Plan - Page 10 4. OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE SUMMARY a. May Operations Report May Operations Report - Page 18 5. FINANCIAL REPORTS a. May NYCT Financial & Ridership Report NYCT Financial Report - Page 55 b. May SIR Financial & Ridership Report SIR Financial Report - Page 77 c. May MTA Bus Financial & Ridership Report MTA Bus Financial Report - Page 88 d. Capital Program Status Report Capital Program Status Report - Page 101 6. PROCUREMENTS July Procurement Staff Summary & Resolution - Page 110 a. Non-Competitive NYCT Non-Competitive Actions - Page 114 b. Competitive NYCT Competitive Actions - Page 116 c. Ratifications NYCT Ratifications - Page 127 7. ACTION ITEMS Approve a. ADA Accessibility ADA Accessibility: 3 Stations -- Sea Beach & West End Lines - Page 131 8. SERVICE CHANGES a. NYCT Bx24 Extension Approve NYCT Bx24 Extension - Page 133 b. NYCT Q17/27 Route Revision NYCT Q17/27 Route Revision - Page 139 c. MTA Bus Q113 Local and Q114 Limited Restructuring MTA Bus Q113 Local and Q114 Limited Restructuring - Page 143 9. SPECIAL REPORTS & PRESENTATIONS a. MetroCard Report MetroCard Report - Page 148 10. STANDARD FOLLOW-UP REPORTS a. NYCT & MTA Bus EEO & Diversity Report NYCT & MTA Bus EEO & Diversity Report - Page 152 b.
    [Show full text]
  • School Bus Services in Rochdale September 2019 to July 2020
    School Bus Services in Rochdale September 2019 to July 2020 Services in this leaflet operate on schooldays only, unless otherwise stated. Services are listed alphabetically under school names. Rochdale Schools 2019-2020 website - 1 - 18/10/19 An introduction to School buses and concessionary fares for students in Greater Manchester Passengers can pay a fare to the driver for each journey shown on this timetable. However, students will need to show an IGO pass to travel at the concessionary (reduced) fare. If students do not have an IGO pass, they will have to pay a higher fare. Most of the journeys shown in this timetable are funded by Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM). The majority of TfGM funded services charge a standard fare and also offer daily return tickets. In some cases, the return ticket can also be used for travel on other journeys which serve similar areas – even if it is provided by a different operator. On most services, students can also buy a weekly scholar’s ticket, which costs £7.40. These are ONLY valid on schooldays on school buses and are available from the bus driver on all services where they are applicable. To help the driver, please try to have the correct fare when buying your ticket. A summary of fares and ticketing information on all school services included in this timetable can be found at https://www.tfgm.com/tickets-and-passes/bus-school-bus-services There are also a small number of TfGM funded services where the operator sets the fares. You will need to check with the operator what fares are available.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Concepts Report for Miami-Dade County and Transit Alliance
    Transit Concepts Report For Miami-Dade County and Transit Alliance September 2019 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 Appendix A: Phase 1 Public Input ....................................................................... 42 What are the big questions? ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Appendix B: Detailed Concept Maps .................................................................. 47 Ridership and Coverage Goals are in Conflict .............................................................................................................. 4 Appendix C: Isochrones ....................................................................................... 53 Public Input in Phase 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 5 What are the Concepts? ............................................................................................................................................... 6 Municipal Trolleys: Redesign for More Useful Service? ................................................................................................ 7 What are the outcomes of each concept? .................................................................................................................... 8 What can you do? ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ultrasonic Sensors Ultrasonic Sensors for Object Detection
    Ultrasonic Sensors Ultrasonic sensors for object detection Regardless of color and surface properties BUS ultrasonic sensors can be used universally and are perfect for distance measurement or position detection of granular materi- als, liquids and powders. They measure fill levels, heights and sag without making contact as well as count and monitor the presence of objects. They do this regardless of color and surface properties. Therefore transparent objects that generate strong reflections pose no problem for them. As precision all-rounders, ultrasonic sensors are particularly suited for critical situations. Dust, dirt and steam do not impair them. Broad detection range – high precision Their detection range extends from 20 mm to 8 m, meaning that even longer object distances can be handled without problem. Their high resolution and small blind zones ensure extreme precision. Integrated synchronization means that the sensors do not interfere with one another. Switching and analog variants BUS ultrasonic sensors differ form one another in their output signal. Each series is available as a switching or analog version, whereby all analog versions are available with voltage or current output (0…10 V or 4…20 mA). The BUS M30 includes variants with two switching outputs, one switching and one analog output or two switching outputs and one analog output so that one sensor can adopt the function of a second sensor. IO-Link BUS 18M sensors with push/pull output are equipped with an IO-Link interface that enables a change from SIO mode to IO-Link mode. 402 Ultrasonic Sensors Contents Media 404 Industries, application areas 405 Application areas, sensor selection 406 Modes 407 Sound cones 408 Cylinder Designs BUS M30 410 BUS M18, BUS W18 418 BUS M12 434 Block Designs BUS R06 428 BUS Q80 436 Accessories for Ultrasonic Sensors 438 Basic information and definitions can be found on page 952.
    [Show full text]
  • Merced High School WASC Self Study Report 2018
    MERCED HIGH SCHOOL SELF-STUDY REPORT 205 W. Olive Avenue Merced, CA 95348 Merced Union High School District February 5 through February 7, 2018 ACS WASC/CDE Focus on Learning Accreditation Manual, 2017 Edition Gdocs 2017 ACS WASC/CDE Edition Merced High School ACS WASC/CDE Self-Study Report 2 Merced High School ACS WASC/CDE Self-Study Report Merced High School WASC Visiting Committee Mr. Chris J. Holleran - Chair Assistant Superintendent - High Schools Mt. Diablo Unified School District Mrs. Christine Amann - Member Assistant Principal, Porterville High School Ms. Meredith DeRoos - Member Science Teacher, Piedmont Hills High School Ms. Carli Kim - Member Assistant Principal, Mission San Jose High School Dr. La Rue Moore, Ph.D - Member Teacher, John F. Kennedy High School Mr. Pete Pulos - Member Principal, Cambridge High School Mr. Bob Spain - Member Assistant Principal, California High School Merced Union High School Board of Trustees Board President, Dave Honey Vice President, John Medearis Clerk, Julio Valadez Board Member, Richard Lopez Board Member, Greg Opinski Merced Union High School District Administration Superintendent, Alan Peterson Deputy Superintendent - Human Resources & District Operations, Ralph Calderon Assistant Superintendent of Business & Student Services, Scott Weimer Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services, Costantino Aguilar 3 Merced High School ACS WASC/CDE Self-Study Report Merced High School WASC Leadership Team Kurt Kollmann, Principal Ellen Chiesa, English Teacher Susan Mikkelsen, Self Study Coordinator
    [Show full text]
  • 2013-Annual Report Final
    MERCED COUNTY SCHOOLS ANNUAL EDUCATION REPORT 2 0 1 3 Proudly Sponsored By MERCED COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION Bond Underwriters & Financial Advisors Steven E. Gomes, Ed.D., County Superintendent of Schools MERCED COUNTY SCHOOLS SCHOOL DISTRICTS HISTORY Merced Union High School District encompasses 8 districts Merced County schools were SNELLING-MERCED FALLS incorporated more than 150 years ago in 1856 when the first County BALLICO- TURLOCK CRESSEY MERCED RIVER Superintendent of Schools, DELHI UNIFIED WINTON William Nelson, petitioned the ELEMENTARY MERCED CITY LIVINGSTON Board of Supervisors to divide the HILMAR UNIFIED UNION ELEENTARY ATWATER ELEMENTARY PLANADA county into three school districts. ELEMENTARY WEAVER UNION ELEMENTARY The 1860 census reported a MC SWAIN UNION ELEMENTARY GUSTINE UNIFIED LE GRAND population of 1,141 in Merced ELEMENTARY County and in 1863, the Schools PLAINSBURG UNION ELEMENTARY EL NIDO ELEMENTARY Superintendent reported an enrollment of 267 children and a county schools budget of $1,000. Le Grand Union High School District encompasses 3 districts The first high school was estab- LOS BANOS UNIFIED lished in 1895 with 27 students and two teachers under the ad- ministration of the County Board DOS PALOS- ORO LOMA UNIFIED of Education. In 1897, a new high school was completed on the corner of 22nd and M Streets in Courthouse Square. Today, there are 20 school dis- tricts with their own Boards of Trustees and Superintendents serving more than 56,000 K-12 students with Steven E. Gomes, Now completed, the Ed.D., serving as the 28th County Merced Union High Superintendent of Schools. School District’s newest high school, El Capitan, currently serves 735 freshman and COVER PHOTOS: Clockwise from top left, sophomore students.
    [Show full text]