The Transit Advocate
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Metro Bus and Metro Rail System
Approximate frequency in minutes Approximate frequency in minutes Approximate frequency in minutes Approximate frequency in minutes Metro Bus Lines East/West Local Service in other areas Weekdays Saturdays Sundays North/South Local Service in other areas Weekdays Saturdays Sundays Limited Stop Service Weekdays Saturdays Sundays Special Service Weekdays Saturdays Sundays Approximate frequency in minutes Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve Weekdays Saturdays Sundays 102 Walnut Park-Florence-East Jefferson Bl- 200 Alvarado St 5-8 11 12-30 10 12-30 12 12-30 302 Sunset Bl Limited 6-20—————— 603 Rampart Bl-Hoover St-Allesandro St- Local Service To/From Downtown LA 29-4038-4531-4545454545 10-12123020-303020-3030 Exposition Bl-Coliseum St 201 Silverlake Bl-Atwater-Glendale 40 40 40 60 60a 60 60a 305 Crosstown Bus:UCLA/Westwood- Colorado St Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve 3045-60————— NEWHALL 105 202 Imperial/Wilmington Station Limited 605 SANTA CLARITA 2 Sunset Bl 3-8 9-10 15-30 12-14 15-30 15-25 20-30 Vernon Av-La Cienega Bl 15-18 18-20 20-60 15 20-60 20 40-60 Willowbrook-Compton-Wilmington 30-60 — 60* — 60* — —60* Grande Vista Av-Boyle Heights- 5 10 15-20 30a 30 30a 30 30a PRINCESSA 4 Santa Monica Bl 7-14 8-14 15-18 12-18 12-15 15-30 15 108 Marina del Rey-Slauson Av-Pico Rivera 4-8 15 18-60 14-17 18-60 15-20 25-60 204 Vermont Av 6-10 10-15 20-30 15-20 15-30 12-15 15-30 312 La Brea -
Ten-Year Bus Fleet Management Plan JUNE 2015 Ten-Year Bus Fleet Management Plan (FY 2016 – FY 2025)
ten-year bus fleet management plan JUNE 2015 Ten-Year Bus Fleet Management Plan (FY 2016 – FY 2025) TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 3 1.0 TRANSIT OPERATIONS ............................................................................................................... 6 1.1 TRANSIT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................... 6 1.2 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE TYPES ........................................................................................... 7 1.3 BUS SERVICE TYPE & LINE IDENTIFICATION......................................................................... 14 1.4 PROGRAMMED TRANSIT PROJECTS..................................................................................... 16 1.5 TRANSIT ACCESS PASS (TAP)................................................................................................ 31 1.6 ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ATMS)........................................ 31 2.0 VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 33 2.1 GENERAL FLEET STATISTICS ................................................................................................. 33 2.2 SPARE RATIO ........................................................................................................................ 35 2.3 CONTINGENCY FLEET .......................................................................................................... -
A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California
A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California A Research Report from the University of California Institute of Transportation Studies Jean-Daniel Saphores, Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Department of Urban Planning and Public Policy, University of California, Irvine Deep Shah, Master’s Student, University of California, Irvine Farzana Khatun, Ph.D. Candidate, University of California, Irvine January 2020 Report No: UC-ITS-2019-55 | DOI: 10.7922/G2XP735Q Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. UC-ITS-2019-55 N/A N/A 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California January 2020 6. Performing Organization Code ITS-Irvine 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Jean-Daniel Saphores, Ph.D., https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9514-0994; Deep Shah; N/A and Farzana Khatun 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. Institute of Transportation Studies, Irvine N/A 4000 Anteater Instruction and Research Building 11. Contract or Grant No. Irvine, CA 92697 UC-ITS-2019-55 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered The University of California Institute of Transportation Studies Final Report (January 2019 - January www.ucits.org 2020) 14. Sponsoring Agency Code UC ITS 15. Supplementary Notes DOI:10.7922/G2XP735Q 16. Abstract To gain a better understanding of the current use and performance of free and reduced-fare transit pass programs, researchers at UC Irvine surveyed California transit agencies with a focus on members of the California Transit Association (CTA) during November and December 2019. -
Public Transportation Modernization Improvement and Service Enhancement Account Prop 1B
State Controller's Office Division Of Accounting And Reporting Public Transportation Modernization Improvement and Service Enhancement Account Prop 1B 2008-2009 Fiscal Year Payment Issue Date: 03/15/2011 Gross Claim Total Calaveras Council of Governments: Transit Bus Stop 138,710.00 138,710.00 Facilities Central Contra Costa Transit Authority: Bus Stop Access 67,115.00 67,115.00 & Amenity Improvements City of Atascadero: Driver and Vehicle Safety 3,156.00 3,156.00 Enhancements City of Beaumont: Purchase and Install Onboard Security 81,867.00 81,867.00 Cameras City of Culver City: Purchase of 20 CNG Transit Buses 372,215.00 372,215.00 City of Eureka: GPS Tracking System 22,880.00 22,880.00 City of Folsom: Security Cameras & Engine Scanner- 12,324.00 12,324.00 Folsom City of Fresno: Bus Rapid Transit Improvements 1,467,896.00 1,467,896.00 City of Fresno: CNG Engine Retrofits 1,800,000.00 1,800,000.00 City of Fresno: FAX Paratransit Facility 129,940.00 129,940.00 City of Fresno: Passenger Amenities Bus Stop 22,000.00 22,000.00 Improvement City of Fresno: Purchase Replacement Paratransit Buses 19,500.00 19,500.00 City of Fresno: Purchase Replacement Support Vehicles 17,000.00 17,000.00 City of Fresno: Purchase/Install Shop Equipment 20,378.00 20,378.00 City of Fresno: Purchase/Install CNG Compressor 54,600.00 54,600.00 City of Healdsburg: Replacement Bus Purchase 1,053.00 1,053.00 Page 1 of 7 Gross Claim Total City of Lodi: Bus Replacements 291,409.00 291,409.00 City of Modesto: Build Bus Fare Depository 20,000.00 20,000.00 City of Modesto: -
Los Angeles Orange Line
Metro Orange Line BRT Project Evaluation OCTOBER 2011 FTA Report No. 0004 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Jennifer Flynn, Research Associate Cheryl Thole, Research Associate Victoria Perk, Senior Research Associate Joseph Samus, Graduate Research Assistant Caleb Van Nostrand, Graduate Research Assistant National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida CCOOVVEERR PPHHOTOOTO LLooss AAnnggeelleess CCoouunnttyy MMeettrrooppololiittanan TTransransppoorrttaattioionn AAuutthhoorriittyy DDIISCSCLLAAIIMMEERR TThhiis ds dooccuumemennt it is is inntteennddeed ad as a ts teecchhnniiccaal al assssiissttaanncce pe prroodduucctt. I. It it is dsiiss ssdeemmiinnaatteed udnn ddueer tr thhe sepp oosnnssoorrsshhiip opf tf tohhe Ue..SS U.. DDeeppaarrttmemennt ot of Tf Trraannssppoorrttaattiioon in in tn thhe ie inntteerreesst ot of if innffoorrmamattiioon enxxcc ehhaannggee. T. Thhe Uenn iittUeed Sdttaa Sttees Gsoo vvGeerrnnmemennt atss ssauumemes nso nlo liiaabbiilliittyy ffoor ir itts cs coonntteenntts os or ur usse te thheerreeooff. T. Thhe Ue Unniitteed Sd Sttaattees Gs Goovveerrnnmemennt dtoo eeds nsoo tn et ennddoorrsse perroo pdduucctts osf mfo aa nnmuuffaaccttuurreerrss. T. Trraadde oerr o mamannuuffaaccttuurreerrss’ n’ naamemes as appppeeaar her herreeiin sn soolleelly by beeccaauusse te thheey ayrre a ceoo nncssiiddeerreed edssss eeennttiiaal tl to tohh et oebb jjeeoccttiivve oef tf tohhiis rs reeppoorrtt.. Metro Orange Line BRT Project Evaluation OCTOBER 2011 FTA Report No. 0004 PREPARED BY Jennifer Flynn, Research Associate Cheryl Thole, Research Associate Victoria Perk, Senior Research Associate Joseph Samus, Graduate Research Assistant Caleb Van Nostrand, Graduate Research Assistant National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT100 Tampa, FL 33620 SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation U.S. -
Fiscal Year (FY) 2011–12 TRANSIT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE REPORT Understanding the Region’S Investments in Public Transportation
Fiscal Year (FY) 2011–12 TRANSIT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE REPORT Understanding the Region’s Investments in Public Transportation Transit/Rail Department PHOTO CREDITS SCAG would like to thank the ollowing transit agencies: • City o Santa Monica, Big Blue Bus • City o Commerce Municipal Bus Lines • Foothill Transit • Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) • Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) • Omnitrans • Victor Valley Transit Authority CONTENTS SECTION 01 Public Transportation in the SCAG Region ........ 1 SECTION 02 Evaluating Transit System Performance ......... 13 SECTION 03 Operator Profiles ....................................... 31 Imperial County .................................... 32 Los Angeles County .............................. 34 Orange County ..................................... 76 Riverside County .................................. 82 San Bernardino County .......................... 93 Ventura County .................................... 99 APPENDIX A Transit Governance in the SCAG Region ......... A1 APPENDIX B System Performance Measures ................... B1 APPENDIX C Reporting Exceptions ................................. C1 SECTION 01 Public Transportation in the SCAG Region Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus (BBB) City o Commerce Municipal Bus Lines (CBL) FY 2011-12 TRANSIT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE REPORT INTRODUCTION The Southern Cali ornia Association o Governments (SCAG) is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) representing six counties in Southern Cali ornia: Imperial, Los -
Smart Location Database Technical Documentation and User Guide
SMART LOCATION DATABASE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION AND USER GUIDE Version 3.0 Updated: June 2021 Authors: Jim Chapman, MSCE, Managing Principal, Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. (UD4H) Eric H. Fox, MScP, Senior Planner, UD4H William Bachman, Ph.D., Senior Analyst, UD4H Lawrence D. Frank, Ph.D., President, UD4H John Thomas, Ph.D., U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization Alexis Rourk Reyes, MSCRP, U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization About This Report The Smart Location Database is a publicly available data product and service provided by the U.S. EPA Smart Growth Program. This version 3.0 documentation builds on, and updates where needed, the version 2.0 document.1 Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. updated this guide for the project called Updating the EPA GSA Smart Location Database. Acknowledgements Urban Design 4 Health was contracted by the U.S. EPA with support from the General Services Administration’s Center for Urban Development to update the Smart Location Database and this User Guide. As the Project Manager for this study, Jim Chapman supervised the data development and authored this updated user guide. Mr. Eric Fox and Dr. William Bachman led all data acquisition, geoprocessing, and spatial analyses undertaken in the development of version 3.0 of the Smart Location Database and co- authored the user guide through substantive contributions to the methods and information provided. Dr. Larry Frank provided data development input and reviewed the report providing critical input and feedback. The authors would like to acknowledge the guidance, review, and support provided by: • Ruth Kroeger, U.S. General Services Administration • Frank Giblin, U.S. -
Transit Access Pass (Tap) & Rail Fare Gate Status
Los Angeles County One Gateway Plaza 213.922.9200 Tel Metropolitan Transportation Authority Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 213.922.9201 Fax rnetro.net 41 REVISED OPERATIONS COMMITTEE APRIL 16,2009 SUBJECT: TRANSIT ACCESS PASS (TAP) & RAIL FARE GATE STATUS ACTION: RECEIVE AND FILE RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file report on the Transit Access Pass (TAP) and Rail Fare Gate Status ISSUE TAP staff was directed to provide a regular status update of project milestones and deployment activities on the Transit Access Pass (TAP@)regional smart card. Also, with the inception of the Metro Rail Fare Gate project, staff was directed to report monthly on the progress of this project. This report serves to fulfd these requests. DISCUSSION There has been significant progress on TAP regional implementation: Municipal Operators - Culver CityBus and Santa Clarita Transit have successfully migrated their UFS systems with full TAP capabilities. Norwalk successfully installed UFS fareboxes with TAP capability on April 3. Foothill, Gardena, and Montebello are in the process of conversion between May and June, 2009. Reduced Fare TAP - Over 60,000 Senior, Disabled, and College/Vocational TAP cards have been produced and mailed to applicants. Day Pass - TAP cards, equipment, and supplies delivered to divisions for scheduled day pass conversion to TAP on March 15. At the point of writing this Board report, the conversion process has gone fairly uneventfully with the exception of card volumes requiring replenishment at bus divisions since customer education and training to re-cycle cards on subsequent usage needs further reinforcement. Metro Pass Sales Outlets - compact point of sales devices have been installed at over 400 pass sales outlets and additional devices are currently being installed at Cities and Senior Centers. -
Short Range Transportation Plan FY 2015 - 2017
Short Range Transportation Plan FY 2015 - 2017 City of Montebello Transportation Department City of Montebello – Transportation Department FY 2015 - 2017 SHORT RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Table of Contents SECTION 1 – OVERVIEW OF THE TRANSIT SYSTEM 1.1 History of the City of Montebello and Montebello Bus Lines ................................ 3 1.2 Governance and Organizational Structure ............................................................. 4 1.3 Transit Services and Areas Served .......................................................................... 5 1.4 Ridership ................................................................................................................. 7 1.5 Fare Structure ......................................................................................................... 7 1.6 Fleet, Facility and Equipment ................................................................................. 8 SECTION 2 – BUDGET, FUNDING, AND REGULATION 2.1 Operating and Capital Budget............................................................................... 10 2.2 Funding Sources.................................................................................................... 10 2.3 Regulatory Requirements ..................................................................................... 11 SECTION 3 – ACCOMPLISHMENTS, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 3.1 Past Accomplishments........................................................................................... 13 3.2 Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................ -
Request for Proposals for Operation of Union
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR OPERATION OF UNION STATION, VAN NUYS, AND ORANGE LINE FLYAWAY BUS SERVICE Release Date: November 20, 2014 Pre-Proposal Conference: December 2, 2014 at 1:30 p.m. Pacific Time Los Angeles World Airports Administration West Building 7301 World Way West, Room 420 Los Angeles, CA 90045 Deadline for Submission of Questions/Requests for Clarification: Submit all questions and requests for clarification in writing to [email protected] no later than 3 p.m. Pacific Time on December 10, 2014 Proposal Due Date: January 22, 2015 no later than 3 p.m. Pacific Time at: Commercial Development Attn: Christine Kalamaros 6053 W. Century Blvd., Suite 400 Los Angeles, CA 90045 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 – GENERAL INFORMATION ................................................................... 3 A. THE OPPORTUNITY .............................................................................. 3 SECTION 2 – BACKGROUND INFORMATION .......................................................... 4 A. LAWA ..................................................................................................... 4 B. DESCRIPTION OF LAX ......................................................................... 4 C. DESCRIPTION OF FLYAWAY FACILITIES ........................................... 4 D. FLEET .................................................................................................... 5 E. FARES ................................................................................................... 5 F. CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS .............................................................. -
Torrance Bus Service Reliability and Improvement Strategies
TORRANCE BUS SERVICE RELIABILITY AND IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES A Project Presented to the Faculty of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master In Urban and Regional Planning By Jose M. Perez 2019 i SIGNATURE PAGE PROJECT: TORRANCE BUS SERVICE RELIABILITY AND IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES AUTHOR: Jose M. Perez DATE SUBMITTED: Spring 2019 Department of Urban and Regional Planning Dr. Alvaro M. Huerta Project Committee Chair Professor of Urban Planning Richard Zimmer Committee Member Lecturer of Urban Planning David Mach Senior Transportation Planner Torrance Transit i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author thanks the Torrance Transit Employees for the data they furnished and their participation in the client project, especially Senior Transportation Planner David Mach. The author would also like to thank the City of Torrance for providing information on future development and specific goals of their circulation plan. Special thanks to Dr. Alvaro M. Huerta and Professor Richard Zimmer for their help and guidance in completing the client project. i ABSTRACT A city’s transportation infrastructure directly affects the mobility of the people, goods, and services, of all who live within its’ limits. Bus transit lines are a key element of a balanced transportation system that can improve or detract from the quality of life of its’ populous. Transit networks that are poorly implemented eventually become impractical and difficult to maintain; and thus, a burden upon the city it’s meant to help. In addition the service reliability of a transit line is critical to both the transit agency and its users in order to maintain a healthy transportation system. -
September 14, 2016
ADVANCED TRANSIT VEHICLE CONSORTIUM Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority One Santa Fe Ave., MS 63-4-1, Los Angeles, CA 90013 SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: JAMES T. GALLAGHER PRESIDENT SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE UPDATE ON ZERO EMISSION BUS PLANS ISSUE At the April 2016 Metro Board of Directors Meeting, Metro's CEO was asked to provide a status report on Metro's deployment plans for Zero Emission Buses, and to provide a comprehensive plan to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions by gradually transitioning to a zero emission bus fleet. BACKGROUND Metro's current deployment plan for Zero Emission Buses (ZEB's) and reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions(GHG) includes the following projects and activities: 1. Purchase of five (5) New Flyer all-electric articulated buses for deployment on Metro's Orange Line with expected delivery in late 2017. 2. Purchase of five (5) BYD all-electric articulated buses, also for use on Metro's Orange Line with expected delivery in late 2017. 3. Purchase of up to two hundred (200)ZE buses under RFP OP28167 for delivery between FY18 — FY22. 4. Expand use of Low NOx "Near Zero" CNG engines and Renewable Natural Gas (RCNG)for all new bus purchases and for mid-life engine repowers stating in FY18. In addition to the ZEB projects, starting in FY18 it is recommended that Metro Operations adopt a policy of purchasing only "Near Zero" Cummins-Westport Low NOx ISL-G engines and renewable natural gas(RCNG) fuel for both new and repowered buses. According to the fleet emission modeling done by Metro's technical consultant, this step will have significant regional air quality benefits, including reducing criteria pollutants for Metro's bus fleet by 90%, and greenhouse gas emissions by 80°/o below 2010 current fleet emission levels.