DOCSLIB.ORG

Review the Draft Network Integration Plan Here

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review the Draft Network Integration Plan Here Draft Network Integration Plan Network Integration Plan June 8, 2021 Executive Summary The 2018 California State Rail Plan articulates a vision of intercity rail, commuter rail, and local mass transit integration, making the rail system easier to access and use. To further this vision, the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) have been funding rail integration plans in various parts of the state to better integrate transit with the state rail system. The Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) Network Integration Plan is one of those plans. SacRT Network Integration Vision The common theme running through all state-sponsored Network Integration Plans is how to provide better connections between local transit and the state rail system. In Sacramento, that system consists of the Capitol Corridor and the San Joaquins intercity trains, which are sponsored by Caltrans and operated by their respective Joint Powers Authorities. In the future, two new San Joaquins roundtrips will be added on the Union Pacific Railroad’s Sacramento Subdivision, stopping at a Midtown Station along the 20th Street corridor. Additionally, the Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) commuter rail service, operating today between Stockton and San Jose, is planning an extension to Sacramento with multiple arrivals and departures. These trains also will stop at the Midtown Station. SacRT serves Sacramento Valley Station (SVS) today with the Gold Line light rail transit (LRT) service and two local bus routes, the 30 and the 38. The Gold Line operates with mostly 15-minute headways between SVS and Sunrise and 30-minute headways between Sunrise and Folsom. SacRT also serves the Midtown area, with the Blue Line and Green Line stopping nearby at 16th Street Station and the 62 Freeport bus route running along 19th Street and 21st Street, providing a connection to and from Downtown Sacramento. Network Integration Elements The realization of improved integration of intercity rail, commuter rail, and SacRT LRT and bus services envisioned in this plan rests on four elements. These elements are: Infrastructure improvements. These are physical improvements to the transit network—some to be implemented by SacRT and some by other agencies—that will play key roles in future service integration. These include the following projects, some of which are actively underway and some of which are still in the planning stages: The SVS Area Plan, which includes the Bus Mobility Center (a multi-level bus terminal), an elevated concourse and circulation deck connecting to the light rail station, and other improvements at SVS. At least four SacRT routes could make use of the BMC in the near- term. The SVS Loop, which includes a north‒south double-track alignment for the Gold Line and Green Line through Sacramento Valley Station and along 7th Street to North B Street. Also included is a new Railyards Station to serve a new Major League Soccer (MLS) stadium and surrounding development. Page ES-1 Double-tracking portions of the Gold Line at Glenn and Hazel Stations, which will allow for 15-minute headways between Sunrise and Folsom. Conversion of SacRT’s existing high-floor light rail vehicle (LRV) fleet to low-floor LRVs, which will facilitate faster boardings and alightings. Station upgrades to allow for level boarding with the new low-floor fleet. The Midtown Station serving future ACE commuter and San Joaquins intercity trains. SacRT will provide local connections at the Midtown Station. The Downtown / Riverfront Streetcar linking SVS with West Sacramento. Light Rail Service Improvements. These are new concepts to expand LRT service, enhancing mobility options. 15-minute headways between Sunrise Station and Folsom Station. Headways are limited to 30 minutes today. The aforementioned double-tracking through Glenn Station is a prerequisite for this service improvement. Peak short-tripper trains to provide supplemental service between Sunrise Station and SVS during the weekday commute periods. Gold and Green Line interlining—that is, extending the Gold Line to 7th & Richards / Township 9 Station, which will require the aforementioned double-tracking of 7th Street between F Street and North B Street. Special event service for the MLS stadium, including both special event trains and augmented regular-service trains. Bus Service Improvements. These include potential modifications to Routes 30, 38, 51, and 62, including service to the BMC, new touch-and-go stops at 5th Street / G Street, and a new bus terminal in the Railyards area. Rerouting the 142 Airport service following a reconfiguration of the northbound I-5 on-ramp from I Street is also being considered. For Midtown Station, potential improvements to Route 62 could facilitate connections for ACE and San Joaquins passengers. Fare and Information Systems Integration and Customer Experience. CalSTA, Caltrans, and intercity and local transit partners have initiated the California Integrated Travel Project (Cal-ITP) to unify and simplify fare collection and trip planning throughout the state. Cal-ITP seeks to achieve this goal by ensuring access to reliable and accurate real-time transit information, reducing friction in payments, and creating a statewide eligibility verification program. SacRT is participating in the Cal-ITP development. Recommendations The Network Integration Plan concludes with recommendations for capital investments, phased implementation of LRT and bus service changes, and fare and information integration that will provide SacRT riders with a more seamless, expeditious, and user-friendly experience. Highlights include: Page ES-2 More double tracking of the Gold Line east of Sunrise Station and prioritization of the 7th Street double track to ensure service reliability and provide more operational flexibility. Phased rollout of 15-minute headways on the Gold Line between Sunrise Station and Folsom Station, starting first with weekday peak-period service only and expanding to all- day service, seven days a week, in later years. Three peak short-trippers between Sunrise Station and SVS. These trains mitigate the loss of seated capacity consequent with the conversion to two- and later three-car low- floor trainsets from four-car high-floor trainsets. Future interlining of the Gold Line and Green Line between SVS and Richards Boulevard / Township 9, which will streamline LRT operations in Downtown Sacramento, improve operating cost efficiencies, and accommodate future ridership growth. Special event LRT service on the Blue and Green Lines serving the future MLS stadium. Initiation of detailed analysis to identify and move forward with a preferred solution for new storage tracks to replace the Gold Line’s SVS tail tracks and accommodate event service staging for the MLS stadium. Extending Routes 30, 38, 51 and 62 to the SVS BMC in the near-term, and to a new Railyards terminal in the long-term. Continued coordination with the City, the Railyards master developer (Downtown Railyard Venture), and individual parcel developers on identifying a preferred option for a new Railyards bus terminal. Increase peak-period frequency on Route 62 to facilitate connections at Midtown Station, particularly in the interim until completion of the new mainline platform at City College Station to allow for cross-platform transfers with the Blue Line. Continued participation in the Cal-ITP project. Page ES-3 (this page intentionally left blank) Page ES-4 Network Integration Plan Table of Contents 1 Purpose, Need and Requirements ..................................................................................... 1 1.1 SacRT Profile ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 California State Rail Plan ............................................................................................. 1 1.3 Network Integration Plans ............................................................................................ 1 1.4 SacRT Network Integration Plan .................................................................................. 2 1.5 Related Projects .......................................................................................................... 3 2 SacRT Service Integration Vision ....................................................................................... 5 2.1 Goal: Improved Integration with the State Rail System ................................................ 5 2.2 Key Network Integration Elements ............................................................................... 6 2.3 Other Integration Efforts ............................................................................................... 8 3 Infrastructure Improvements ............................................................................................... 9 3.1 Sacramento Valley Station ..........................................................................................10 3.2 Sacramento Valley Station Area Plan .........................................................................13 3.3 SVS Loop ...................................................................................................................26 3.4 Folsom and Rancho Cordova Double Track................................................................28 3.5 Low-Floor Conversion .................................................................................................31 3.6 Midtown Station ..........................................................................................................38
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Yuba Sutter Short Range Transit Plan
    Yuba Sutter Short Range Transit Plan Final Plan Prepared for the Yuba Sutter Transit Authority Prepared by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. Yuba-Sutter Transit Authority Short Range Transit Plan Prepared for the Yuba Sutter Transit Authority 2100 B Street Marysville, CA 95901 530 742-2877 Prepared by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. P.O. Box 5875 2690 Lake Forest Road, Suite C Tahoe City, California 96145 530 583-4053 June 5, 2015 LSC #147390 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page Executive Summary 1 Introduction and Key Study Issues ............................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 Study Issues ................................................................................................................ 1 2 Existing Community Conditions .................................................................................... 3 3 Review of Existing Transit Services ............................................................................ 23 Yuba Sutter Transit Authority .................................................................................... 23 Transit Capital Assets ............................................................................................... 70 Other Transit Providers in Yuba-Sutter Counties ...................................................... 72 4 Outreach Efforts and Survey Summaries ..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: November 18, 2020 ITEM #12
    CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: November 18, 2020 ITEM #12 SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A STREETCAR SERVICE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF AN OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE SACRAMENTO REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT INITIATED OR REQUESTED BY: REPORT COORDINATED OR PREPARED BY: [ ] Commission [ X ] Staff Jason McCoy, Supervising Transportation Planner Capital Projects and Transportation Department [ ] Other ATTACHMENT [ X ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Information [ ] Direction [ X ] Action OBJECTIVE This report provides the City Council with a thorough background and update on the status of the revised Downtown Riverfront Streetcar (Streetcar Project) and provides an opportunity for Staff to receive direction from the City Council pertaining to the Streetcar Service Memorandum of Understanding. RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff respectfully requests that the City Council: 1) Approve the attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT) as a framework for developing an Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement for the Streetcar Project, and delegate authority to the City Manager to execute the MOU; and 2) Recommend that the Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT) Board of Directors execute the MOU at their December 14, 2020 meeting as a framework for developing an Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement for the Streetcar Project. BACKGROUND The Streetcar Project received approval from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to enter Project Development as a Small Starts Project in 2014. This FTA discretionary grant program funds transit capital investments such as light rail and bus rapid transit and requires completion of the Project Development phase in advance of receipt of a construction grant agreement. The original scope of the Streetcar Project was an approximately four-mile looped system extending between the West Sacramento Civic Center and Riverfront Street, across Tower Bridge over the Sacramento River and into Downtown and Midtown Sacramento.
    [Show full text]
  • Woodland Transit Study
    Woodland Transit Study Prepared for the Yolo County Transportation District Prepared by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. Woodland Transit Study Prepared for the Yolo County Transportation District 350 Industrial Way Woodland, CA 95776 530 402-2819 Prepared by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. P.O. Box 5875 2690 Lake Forest Road, Suite C Tahoe City, California 96145 530 583-4053 April 27, 2016 LSC #157020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1 Introduction and Key Study Issues ............................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 Study Issues ................................................................................................................ 1 2 Existing Community Conditions .................................................................................... 3 Geography of Yolo County .......................................................................................... 3 Demographics ............................................................................................................. 3 Economy ................................................................................................................... 13 3 Review of Existing Transit Services ............................................................................ 19 Yolo County Transportation District ........................................................................... 19 Existing Woodland
    [Show full text]
  • City of Elk Grove Public Transit Fares
    AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.2 CITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA TITLE: Consider 1) approving a proposal by MV Transportation for a new reverse commute service rate of $25/hour; and 2) authorizing staff to notice new fare rates and services for reverse commuting MEETING DATE: January 25, 2012 PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT HEAD: Richard Shepard, Public Works Director / City Engineer RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Staff recommends the City Council consider: 1) Approving a proposal by MV Transportation for a new reverse commute service rate of $25/hour; and 2) Authorizing staff to notice new fare rates and services for reverse commuting. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On December 14, 2011, City Council heard an item discussing costs of implementing reverse commute services between Elk Grove and Downtown Sacramento in order to support the relocation of the California Correctional Health Care Services (CCHCS) Department. Consistent with existing contract requirements, it was estimated that the net cost of this service would be approximately $94,000 per year. This net cost was estimated assuming the following: 1 Elk Grove City Council January 25, 2012 Page 2 of 6 Estimated Cost of New Reverse Commute Service New service costs at the $190,000 contracted rate of $53.09/hour Less new revenue based on 100 new monthly permits at a reduced <$96,000> cost of $80/month Estimated net annual cost $94,000 Since a majority of the reverse commute service would come from using buses that are “dead-heading” (returning empty), Council requested that staff negotiate with MV Transportation, Inc. (MV) to reduce the contracted rate to a level that would make the service revenue neutral to the City.
    [Show full text]
  • Yolo County Transportation District 350 Industrial Way
    Yolo County Transportation District 350 Industrial Way Woodland, CA 95776 City of Davis – City of West Sacramento – City of Winters 530.661.0816 FAX: 530.661.1732 City of Woodland – County of Yolo EX Officio – Caltrans District 3 – University of California, Davis www.yolobus.com Paid Internship Position Title: Transportation Planning Internship Background: The Yolo County Transportation District (YCTD) operates both local and intercity transit service (YOLOBUS) in the cities and communities of Davis, West Sacramento, Winters, Woodland, and to unincorporated communities of Yolo County. Additionally, YCTD is also the Congestion Management Agency for Yolo County, and serves as the interim administrator of the Yolo Transportation Management Association (TMA) Yolo Commute. YCTD staff is currently comprised of eleven full time employees, in addition to approximately 100 contract employees. YCTD has been awarded grant funding to continue its internship program through Fiscal Year 2018/19. Past internship participants have successfully leveraged their experiences with YCTD into full-time positions with public agencies including the District itself, Caltrans, Sacramento Regional Transit, AC Transit, and more. Description: YCTD seeks to hire up to six (6) interns in Fiscal Year 2018/19 to assist in transportation planning, marketing, communications, public relations, and operations related tasks and assignments: Activities will include but not be limited to: o Inventorying and assessing condition of Yolobus stops throughout the service area; o
    [Show full text]
  • San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Teleconference Board Meeting
    Chair, Christina Fugazi, City of Stockton Commissioner, Nancy Young, City of Tracy Vice Chair, Leo Zuber, City of Ripon Commissioner, Kathy Miller, San Joaquin County Commissioner, Jose Nuño, City of Manteca Commissioner, Melissa Hernandez, Alameda County Commissioner, Lily Mei, City of Fremont Commissioner, Mikey Hothi, City of Lodi Executive Director, Stacey Mortensen SAN JOAQUIN REGIONAL RAIL COMMISSION TELECONFERENCE BOARD MEETING June 4, 2021 – 8:00 am Call-In Information: +1 (646) 749-3122 Access Code: 185-391-325 GoToMeeting Link: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/185391325 SPECIAL NOTICE Coronavirus COVID-19 In accordance with the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20, San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Board Members will be attending this meeting via teleconference or videoconference. Members of the public may observe the meeting by dialing +1 (646) 749- 3122 with access code: 185-391-325 or log-in using a computer, tablet or smartphone at GoToMeeting.com using link: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/185391325 Please note that all members of the public will be placed on mute until such times allow for public comments to be made. If a person wishes to make a public comment during the meeting, to do so they must either 1) use GoToMeeting and will have the option to notify SJRRC staff by alerting them via the “Chat” function or they can 2) contact SJRRC staff via email at [email protected] in which staff will read the comment aloud during the public comment period. Emailed public comments should be limited to approximately 240 words as comments will be limited to two (2) minutes per comment.
    [Show full text]
  • RPP Packet Attachments
    Sacramento Area 1415 L Street, tel: 916.321.9000 Suite 300 fax: 916.321.9551 Council of Sacramento, CA tdd: 916.321.9550 Governments 95814 www.sacog.org Regional Planning Partnership Wednesday, October 23, 2019, 2:00 to 3:30 p.m. SACOG Rivers Room, 1415 L Street, Suite 300, Sacramento, CA Meeting Information: https://www.gotomeet.me/GoToMeetingSACOG1 You can also dial in using your phone: Dial-in #: 877-568-4106 Access Code: 732-591-877 The purpose of the Partnership is to assist SACOG with its transportation and air quality planning and programming processes, with an emphasis on technical issues, by providing consultation with a broad range of public and private constituencies. It also provides a forum for local agencies in the region’s transportation and land use industry to contribute to the policy-making and fund programming activities of SACOG, and to improve coordination within the region. The Regional Planning Partnership (RPP) consists of the five local air districts, representatives of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), California Air Resources Board (ARB), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and state and local transportation agencies. The RPP meets bimonthly. Each RPP meeting is open to the public and held at the SACOG offices. 1. Introductions (Renée DeVere-Oki, 5 minutes) o Welcome o What is the RPP? o Introductions in room, phone, computer. Please enter your name upon logging in. 2. The SACOG Regional Agencies Partnership Update o Updates from Staff (12 minutes) . Topics in Transit – (Barbara VaughanBechtold, 5 minutes) Update on any current topics in transit and SACOG’s Transit Coordinating Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • March 2, 2017 TO: El Dorado County Transit
    AGENDA ITEM 1 D Consent Item MEMORANDUM DATE: March 2, 2017 TO: El Dorado County Transit Authority FROM: Brian James, Planning and Marketing Manager SUBJECT: Regional Fare Comparison REQUESTED ACTION: BY MOTION, Receive and File Regional Fare Comparison BACKGROUND The El Dorado County Transit Authority (El Dorado Transit) routinely surveys regional transit operators for current fare and fare policy information. In January 2017, staff conducted research to compile current fare information for seven (7) regional operators. The following offers comparisons of regional fares, categorized by service type. DISCUSSION Local Fixed Routes The following chart reflects local fixed route fares for the transit operators surveyed: One-Way Fares Monthly Pass/Ticket Books General Senior/Disabled Student General Senior/Disabled Student El Dorado Transit $1.50 $0.75 $0.75 $60.00 $30.00 $30.00 Folsom Stage Lines $2.50 $1.25 $1.25 $50.00 $25.00 $25.00 Roseville Transit $1.50 $0.75 $0.75 $58.00 $29.00 $29.00 Placer County Transit $1.25 $0.60 $0.60 $37.50 $18.75 $18.75 Yolobus $2.25 $1.10 $1.10 $93.50 $46.75 $46.75 Yuba-Sutter Transit $1.00 $0.50 $0.50 $30.00 $6.00 $6.00 Amador Transit $2.00 $1.00 $1.00 $100.00 $60.00 $60.00 Sacramento Regional Transit $2.75 $1.35 $1.35 $110.00 $55.00 $55.00 Averages $1.84 $0.91 $0.91 $67.38 $33.81 $33.81 El Dorado County Transit Authority March 2, 2017 Agenda One-way fares for local fixed route services in the region range from $1.00 to $2.75, with half price discounts typically offered for seniors, persons with disabilities per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and students.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternatives Analysis for High Capacity Public Transit on the Rail
    Proposal Alternatives Analysis for High Capacity Public Transit on the Rail Right of Way Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission in Partnership with Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) RFP 2020-08-05 September 3, 2019 Contents 01 Transmittal Letter I 02 Work Plan 01 03 Schedule 09 04 Cost Proposal 10 05 Firm Qualifi cations 12 06 Project Team, Organization Chart, and Staffi ng Plan 16 07 Qualifi cations and Relevant Experience 19 08 Federally/State-Funded Transportation Project Experience 23 09 Management Approach 24 10 References 26 Appendix A Additional Information Appendix B Resumes Appendix C Exceptions and Deviations Appendix D Cost Proposal Detail by Task Appendix E Required Forms HDR supports sustainable resource conservation and material recycling practices. This proposal package is 100% recyclable. This page is intentionally left blank. September 3, 2019 Ginger Dykaar Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission 1523 Pacifi c Avenue Santa Cruz, CA 95060 RE: Proposal for Alternatives Analysis for High Capacity Public Transit on the Rail Right of Way RFP 2020-08-05 Dear Ms. Dykaar, HDR, a full service Planning and Engineering Corporation with a long-history of transportation planning and alternatives analysis experience, is pleased to submit this proposal to assist the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) and Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) to conduct a high capacity transit alternatives analysis for the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line. We have thoughtfully developed a complete team to meet every technical challenge required of the RTC and METRO including expertise across all transit modes and systems; federal, state, and local transport fi nance; travel modeling and market assessment; active transportation and trails; performance-based planning using triple bottom line processes and linkages to vision and goals; economic growth analysis; environmental and engineering constraints and design needs; value engineering and business planning; and engaging public and stakeholder partners.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • FY2021/22 Proposed Budget
    DARRELL STEINBERG CITY OF SACRAMENTO FACTS CITY OF SACRAMENTO Mayor The City of Sacramento was founded in 1849 and 2022 ANGELIQUE ASHBY CITY BUDGET | FISCAL SACRAMENTO OF YEAR | PROPOSED 2021-2022 Mayor Pro Tempore, District 1 is the oldest incorporated city in California. Proposed SEAN LOLOEE In 1920, city voters adopted a Charter (municipal Councilmember, District 2 constitution) and a City Council/City Manager form 2021 Budget of government. JEFF HARRIS Councilmember, District 3 The City is divided into eight districts. KATIE VALENZUELA Councilmember, District 4 Elected members of the City Council serve a four- year term. JAY SCHENIRER Vice Mayor, District 5 The Mayor is elected by all voters in the City. In ERIC GUERRA 2002, voters approved a measure for the Mayor Councilmember, District 6 to serve full-time. All other Councilmembers are elected by district and serve part-time. RICK JENNINGS, II Councilmember, District 7 The Mayor and other Councilmembers have an MAI VANG equal vote in all matters. Councilmember, District 8 The City of Sacramento currently encompasses approximately 100 square miles. The current estimated population is 510,931. CityofSacramento.org PROPOSED CITY OF SACRAMENTO FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 BUDGET DARRELL STEINBERG Mayor ANGELIQUE ASHBY JAY SCHENIRER Mayor Pro Tempore, District 1 Vice Mayor, District 5 SEAN LOLOEE ERIC GUERRA Councilmember, District 2 Councilmember, District 6 JEFF HARRIS RICK JENNINGS, II Councilmember, District 3 Councilmember, District 7 KATIE VALENZUELA MAI VANG Councilmember, District 4 Councilmember,
    [Show full text]
  • Ridership Report (October 2019)
    Ridership Report (October 2019) Year to Date Summary Category FY20 YTD FY19YTD Difference % Change Trailing 12 Month Trend Bus 3,518,921 3,415,852 103,069 3.0% 11,500,000 Light Rail 3,848,176 3,641,112 207,064 5.7% Rail Bus System Total 7,367,097 7,056,964 310,133 4.4% 11,000,000 10,500,000 Current Month Summary 10,000,000 Category October 2019 October 2018 Difference % Change Bus 1,059,668 1,014,352 45,316 4.5% 9,500,000 Light Rail 1,063,740 1,025,613 38,127 3.7% System Total 2,123,408 2,039,965 83,443 4.1% 9,000,000 Daily Summary Category October 2019 October 2018 Difference % Change Bus (M-F) 41,415 40,275 1,140 2.8% Bus (Sat) 15,390 13,266 2,124 16.0% Bus (Sun) 10,371 7,915 2,456 31.0% October Ridership by Mode Light Rail (M-F) 40,939 40,510 429 1.1% 6% Light Rail (Sat) 17,127 13,500 3,627 26.9% Light Rail Light Rail (Sun) 12,229 9,500 2,729 28.7% Fixed Route 48% Other Services E-Tran Ridership Summary (E-Van included) 46% Category Current Year Prior Year Difference % Change E-Tran (YTD) 280,319 266,440 13,879 5.2% E-Tran (Monthly) 84,775 81,648 3,127 3.8% Other services include E-Tran, Folsom, SmaRT Ride, CBS and Special Services E-Tran (Weekday) 3,560 3,426 134 3.9% Route Level Ridership Comparison (Bus) Weelday Route Comparison Saturday Route Comparison Route Oct 2019 Oct 2018 Difference % Change Route Oct 2019 Oct 2018 Difference % Change 1 2,067 2,190 (124) -6% 1 768 777 (9) -1% 11 972 715 257 36% 11 447 282 165 59% 13 678 315 362 115% 13 426 - 426 15 795 1,215 (420) -35% 15 381 558 (176) -32% 19 423 658 (234) -36% 19 209 271
    [Show full text]