DOCSLIB.ORG

January 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

SORTA PLANNING AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 8TH, 2019- 9:00 A.M. SORTA/METRO BOARD ROOM 602 MAIN STREET, SUITE 1200 CINCINNATI, OHIO General Items: Call to order Pledge of Allegiance Recite Mission and Vision Statement 1. Approval of Planning & Operations Committee Minutes: December 11, 2018 Briefing Items 2. MaaS App Update (Khaled Shammout) 3. Reallocate and Mobility Demand Update (Khaled Shammout and Mark McEwan) 4. Ridership Reports for December 2018 (Mark McEwan) To be presented at meeting… 5. ODOT Annual State Safety Oversight Program Status (T.J Thorn) Action Items: 6. Proposed Motion: Approval of Agency Safety Plan-Bus (T.J Thorn) 7. Proposed Motion: Approval of Agency Safety Plan-Rail (T.J Thorn) 8. Proposed Resolution: Approval of Contract for Security Services at Riverfront Transit Center (Mike Weil) 9. Proposed Resolution: Approval to Purchase Paratransit Vehicles (John Edmondson) 10. Proposed Motion: Approval of Modification for Appointment of OKI Board (David Riposo) Other Items: Adjournment The next regular meeting of the Planning & Operations Committee has been scheduled for Tuesday, February 12th, 2019 at 9:00 a.m., the SORTA/Metro Board Room, 602 Main Street, Suite 1200, Cincinnati, Ohio The SORTA Board of Trustees may go into Executive “Closed” Session under the Ohio Open Meetings Act: Section 121.22(G)(1) To consider appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion, demotion, or compensation of a public employee…; Section 121.22(G)(2) To consider the purchase of property for public purposes….; Section 121.22(G)(3) Conferences with an attorney for the public body concerning disputes involving the public body that are the subject of pending or imminent court action; Section 121.22(G)(4) Preparing for, conducting, or reviewing negotiations or bargaining sessions with public employees…, Section 121.22(G)(5) Matters required to be kept confidential by federal law or regulations or stat statues; Section 121.22(G)(6) Details relative to the security arrangements and emergency response protocols for a public body or a public office; Section 121.22(G)(8) To consider confidential information related to the marketing plans, specific business strategy, production techniques, trade secrets… PLANNING & OPERATIONS COMMITTEE TH, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 11 2018 – 9:15 A.M. SORTA/METRO MT. ADAMS BOARD ROOM 602 MAIN STREET, SUITE 1200 CINCINNATI, OHIO COMMITTEE/BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Brendon Cull, Allen Freeman, Robert Harris, Kreg Keesee, Pete McLinden, Mary Miller and Kathleen Wyenandt COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Gwen Robinson STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Dwight Ferrell, Donna Adkins, John Edmondson, Barbara Gardner- Evans, Dan Feldman, Pat Giblin, Paul Grether, Adriene Hairston, Darryl Haley, Sallie Hilvers, Brandy Jones, Caprice Jones, Maria Jones, Michelle Jeng, Mark McEwan, Greta Perry, Kelly Pierson, Cindy Resor, David Riposo, Judy Ross, Shannel Satterfield and Khaled Shammout OTHERS PRESENT: Kim Schaefer (Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease, LLP), Alana Tucker (Government Strategies), Hannah Sparling (Media), Chris Moran (LWV) 1. Call to Order Mr. Cull called the meeting to order. 2. Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 3. SORTA’s Vision and Mission Statements SORTA’s vision and mission statements were recited. 4. Approval of Minutes of November 7th, 2018 Ms. Miller made a motion that the minutes of the November 7th meeting be approved as previously emailed and Mr. Freeman seconded the motion. By voice vote, the Committee approved the minutes. 5. Proposed Resolution: Approval to Purchase Motor Oil Mr. Haley requested approval to enter into a one (1) year contract with Glockner Oil Company on behalf of SORTA at a cost not to exceed $128,160 for motor oil purchases. The Committee agreed to recommend this resolution to the SORTA Board for approval. This item was moved to the December Board Consent Agenda. 6. Proposed Resolution: Approval to Purchase Non-Revenue Vehicle Fuel Mr. Edmondson request approval to enter into a five (5) year contract with Thornton’s Inc., for fleet card services to purchase non-revenue vehicle fuel on behalf of SORTA, at a cost not to exceed $413,563. The Committee agreed to recommend this resolution to the SORTA Board for approval. This item was moved to the December Board Consent Agenda. 1 7. Proposed Resolution: Approval of Revenue Contract with CVG Partners II, LLC Mr. Shammout requested approval to enter into a one (1) year revenue agreement with CVG Partners II, LLC at an estimated contract value of $132,000 for the period of January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019. The Committee agreed to recommend this resolution to the SORTA Board for approval. This item was moved to the December Board Consent Agenda. 8. Proposed Resolution: Approval of Revenue Contract with Duke Energy Mr. Shammout requested approval to execute a one (1) year revenue contract for 2019, with one- year options for 2020 and 2021, with Duke Energy for the Riverfront Parking Shuttle (Route 85), at an estimated contract value of $100,000 per a year. The Committee agreed to recommend this resolution to the SORTA Board for approval. This item was moved to the December Board Consent Agenda. 9. Proposed Resolution: Approval of Service Contract with Butler County Mr. Shammout requested approval to enter into a one (1) year agreement with Butler County Regional Transit Authority (BCRTA) for a continuation of services at an estimated contract value of $585,813 for the period of January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019. The Committee agreed to recommend this resolution to the SORTA Board for approval. This item was moved to the December Board Consent Agenda. 10. Proposed Resolution: Approval of Service Contract with Clermont County Mr. Shammout requested approval to enter into a one (1) year agreement with Clermont County for a continuation of services at an estimated contract value of $550,004 for the period of January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019. The Committee agreed to recommend this resolution to the SORTA Board for approval. This item was moved to the December Board Consent Agenda. 11. Proposed Resolution: Approval of Service Contract with Warren County Mr. Shammout requested approval to enter into a one (1) year agreement with Warren County for funding of the Warren County service at an estimated contract value cost of $393,448 for the period of January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019. The Committee agreed to recommend this resolution to the SORTA Board for approval. This item was moved to the December Board Consent Agenda. 12. Review of Underperforming KPI’s and Recommendations Mr. McEwan provided an update and recommendations regarding the local and express underperforming routes. This presentation included passengers per hour information for 2017 & 2018, percent deviation, and general comments. He also discussed three key points: Cut Routes, Reallocate Service, and Mobility on Demand, which the Committee then asked Mr. McEwan and staff to extract on all three points and report back to the Board in January. 13. Update on Bus Stop Optimization Project and Upcoming Pilot Mr. Shammout discussed the bus stop optimization project and the pilot. His presentation included a completed task list such as the inventory of 4,500 stops, bus stop criteria, pilot route & segment 2 selection methodology, and the identification and analyzation of five (5) routes for the pilot. Mr. Haley assured the Committee that he and staff will continue to update the Board during this process. Mr. Shammout also shared a two minute video clip which was released on the ReinventingMetro.com web page. 14. Ridership Reports for November 2018 Mr. McEwan presented the November 2018 ridership reports. Total ridership for the month of November was 1,128,719 which was below budget. On-time performance was 81.6% for local routes, against a goal of 88%. Local routes are carrying 18.7 passengers per hour, against a goal of 20.7 and express routes are carrying 13.5 passengers per trip, against a goal of 16.2. Missed Trips for the month was 137 against 62,652 total trips. The November Access ridership report; total ridership for Access was 18,735, 1.9% above budget. On-time performance was 91.0% against a goal of 93.0%. The Cincinnati Bell Connector ridership report for November 2018; total preliminary ridership was 34,674, 3.7 and 1,329 below budget. Average Headway (Peak/Off Peak) was 12:53/15:24 against a goal of 12:00/15:00. The Committee accepted the report as presented. 15. Quarterly Rail Update as of November 2018 Mr. Grether presented the November 2018 rail update. The report included safety metrics, marketing communications highlights, ridership & operations summaries, and the current fleet status. In November, 22 citations were issued. January ridership summary includes: weekday ridership at 20,378 riders, Saturday’s 9,238, and Sunday’s ridership 4,803, with a preliminary total of 34,674 for the month of December. The key statistics for the streetcar, included trips scheduled (2,258), trips operated (2,156), missed trips (102), blockages (103), signal failures (5), close calls (23), TAA (223) and charters (3). Current fleet status: Camera/Monitor issues, air compressor FMI underway-3 trains implemented, and field modifications that are on-going by CAF scheduled through March 2019. The Committee accepted the report as presented. 16. New Business The next regular meeting of the Planning and Operations Committee has been scheduled for Tuesday, January 8th, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. 17. Adjournment The meeting adjourned
Recommended publications
  • Can Public Transit Revitalize Detroit? the Qline and the People Mover”

    Can Public Transit Revitalize Detroit? the Qline and the People Mover”

    “Can Public Transit Revitalize Detroit? The QLine and the People Mover” John B. Sutcliffe, Sarah Cipkar and Geoffrey Alchin Department of Political Science, University of Windsor Windsor, Ontario, N9B 3P4 Email: [email protected] Paper prepared for presentation at the Canadian Political Science Association Annual Conference, Vancouver, BC. June 2019. This is a working draft. Please do not cite without permission. 1 “Can Public Transit Revitalize Detroit? The QLine and the People Mover" Introduction On May 12, 2017 a new streetcar – the QLine – began operating in Detroit, running along a 3.3- mile (6.6-mile return) route on Woodward Avenue, one of the central north-south roads in the city. This project is one example of the return to prominence of streetcars in the (re)development of American cities. Having fallen into disuse and abandonment in hundreds of American cities during the early part of the 20th century, this form of public transit has returned in many cities including, for example, Dallas, Cincinnati, Kansas City, and Portland. As streetcar services have returned to prominence, so too has the debate about their utility as a form of public transit, the function they serve in a city, and who they serve (Brown 2013; Culver 2017). These debates are evident in the case of Detroit. Proponents of the QLine – most prominently the individuals and organizations that advocated for its creation and provided the majority of the start-up capital – have praised the streetcar for acting as a spur to development, for being a forward-thinking transit system and for acting as a first step towards a comprehensive regional transit system in Metro Detroit (see M-1 Rail 2018).
  • Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) Rail Transit State Safety Oversight (SSO) Program

    Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) Rail Transit State Safety Oversight (SSO) Program

    Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) Rail Transit State Safety Oversight (SSO) Program Procedure SSO-003: Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) Rail System and the Cincinnati Bell Connector Streetcar Reportable Safety Event (Accident/Incident) Notifications to the ODOT SSO Program and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Current Version: January 28, 2019 [Note: all older versions of this procedure should be discarded] Scope: This procedure provides the notification processes to be used by the Ohio Rail Transit Agencies (RTAs) – GCRTA and Cincinnati Bell Connector Streetcar, and ODOT SSO, for reportable safety events (accidents/incidents) that occur on the GCRTA or Cincinnati Bell Connector Streetcar rail systems and rail-related property. Notification requirements are provided in federal and state regulations, and additional guidance has been provided by FTA, including the National Transit Database (NTD) reporting requirements. Federal Regulation – 49 CFR Part 674.7 and 674.33 FTA Guidance – Two-Hour Accident Notification Guide, https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations- and-guidance/safety/two-hour-accident-notification-guide-0 NTD Safety & Security (S&S) Reporting Manual, https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/ntd/69096/2018-safety-and-security- policy-manual.pdf GCRTA and Cincinnati Bell Connector Streetcar Reportable Event Notification Process: As defined in 49 CFR Part 674.33(a), notification shall be made to the ODOT SSO program staff (contact information below in table), by telephone, within two (2) hours for any safety event. If the safety event is reportable to the FTA (49 CFR Part 674), the Ohio RTA will notify FTA with initial information, as required by FTA and also within the 2-hour time period, at [email protected] (preferred) or telephone at (202) 366-1863.
  • Light Rail Transit (LRT) ♦Rapid ♦Streetcar

    Light Rail Transit (LRT) ♦Rapid ♦Streetcar

    Methodological Considerations in Assessing the Urban Economic and Land-Use Impacts of Light Rail Development Lyndon Henry Transportation Planning Consultant Mobility Planning Associates Austin, Texas Olivia Schneider Researcher Light Rail Now Rochester, New York David Dobbs Publisher Light Rail Now Austin, Texas Evidence-Based Consensus: Major Transit Investment Does Influence Economic Development … … But by how much? How to evaluate it? (No easy answer) Screenshot of Phoenix Business Journal headline: L. Henry Study Focus: Three Typical Major Urban Transit Modes ■ Light Rail Transit (LRT) ♦Rapid ♦Streetcar ■ Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Why Include BRT? • Particularly helps illustrate methodological issues • Widespread publicity of assertions promoting BRT has generated national and international interest in transit-related economic development issues Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) Widely publicized assertion: “Per dollar of transit investment, and under similar conditions, Bus Rapid Transit leverages more transit-oriented development investment than Light Rail Transit or streetcars.” Key Issues in Evaluating Transit Project’s Economic Impact • Was transit project a catalyst to economic development or just an adjunctive amenity? • Other salient factors involved in stimulating economic development? • Evaluated by analyzing preponderance of civic consensus and other contextual factors Data Sources: Economic Impacts • Formal studies • Tallies/assessments by civic groups, business associations, news media, etc. • Reliability
  • Solano Express Bus Routes Transit Information Pleasant Hill Station Area Contra Costa Centre

    Solano Express Bus Routes Transit Information Pleasant Hill Station Area Contra Costa Centre

    Fare Information effective January 1, 2016 Senior3 Adult/ (65+) Youth2 County Connection & (6-64) For more detailed information about BART Disabled service, please see the BART Schedule, BART 1 Transit CASH FARES (exact change only) Regional Transit Map System Map, and other BART information REGIONAL TRANSIT DIAGRAM displays in this station. Regular Ride $2.00 $1.00 To To Express Ride (900 series route numbers) $2.25 $1.00 Eureka Clearlake Information Mendocino Transit DOWNTOWN AREA TRANSIT CONNECTIONS PREPAID FARES Authority To Ukiah Lake Oakland ® 4 $2.00 $1.00 Mendocino Transit 12th Street Oakland City Center BART: Clipper Cash Value Greyhound BART, AC Transit 19th Street Oakland BART: 5 $3.75 $1.75 BART, AC Transit Day Pass Cloverdale San Francisco Yolobus To Davis Discount Regular/Express 20-Ride Pass N/A $15.00 Civic Center/UN Plaza BART: Winters BART, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans Commuter Card (20 Regular+BART Transfer-Rides) $40.00 N/A Pleasant Hill 101 Embarcadero BART & Ferry Terminal: BART, Golden Gate Transit, Muni, SamTrans, Baylink, Alameda/Oakland Ferry, Alameda Harbor Faireld and 6 $60.00 N/A Healdsburg Bay Ferry, Blue & Gold Fleet, Amtrak CA Thruway Suisun Transit East Bay Regional Local 31-Day Transit To Sacramento Mongomery Street BART: Healdsburg BART, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans Dixon 6 $70.00 N/A Calistoga Readi- County Connection (CCCTA) effective January 1, 2016 East Bay Regional Express 31-Day Handi Powell Street BART: San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Fare Information Station Area Ride BART Red* Ticket
  • South Florida Transit Resource Guide

    South Florida Transit Resource Guide

    SECOND EDITION Improving the Connection between Transit and Land Use SOUTH FLORIDA TRANSIT RESOURCE GUIDE June 2015 June 15, 2015 Dear Colleague: The South Florida Regional Transportation Authority (SFRTA) is pleased to introduce the second edition of the South Florida Transit Resource Guide, which demonstrates the vital connection between transportation and land use throughout Broward, Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach Counties. The first edition was well received and was awarded an honorable mention in the 2010 Transportation Planning Excellence Awards sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Decisions involving transportation and land use directly affect our quality of life and the economic vitality of the region. The choices we make influence how much free time we have, where we live and work, our recreational activities, how we travel, the state of our environment, and so much more. The SFRTA seeks to coordinate, develop and implement, in cooperation with all appropriate levels of government, private enterprise and citizens a regional transportation system in South Florida that ensures mobility, the advancement of sustainable growth and improvement in the quality of life for future generations. Increased development around Tri-Rail stations not only positively impacts Tri-Rail ridership, but can also influence regional growth as it pertains to transportation and land use. Station area- development decisions are governed by the city or county in which each station is located. This publication profiles the many factors which affect how the cities and counties promote station- area development. In summary, we hope this document provides the information needed to help communities and organizations make decisions which can improve the connection between land use and transportation.
  • FINGAL / NORTH DUBLIN TRANSPORT STUDY STAGE ONE APPRAISAL REPORT November 2014 AECOM National Transport Authority Fingal / North Dublin Transport Study

    FINGAL / NORTH DUBLIN TRANSPORT STUDY STAGE ONE APPRAISAL REPORT November 2014 AECOM National Transport Authority Fingal / North Dublin Transport Study

    FINGAL / NORTH DUBLIN TRANSPORT STUDY STAGE ONE APPRAISAL REPORT November 2014 AECOM National Transport Authority Fingal / North Dublin Transport Study FINGAL / NORTH DUBLIN TRANSPORT STUDY STAGE ONE APPRAISAL REPORT Document No: ......... 04 Made: ....................... John Finnegan, Sarah Moraillon, Elaine Brick Checked: ................. Joe Seymour Approved: ............... Gary MacDonald Revision Description Made Checked Approved Date Revised 02 JF/SM SD/JS GM 11/11/14 Draft Revised 03 JF/SM SD/JS GM 18/11/14 Draft Final 04 JS EB GM 19/11/14 report Stage One Appraisal Report: November 2014 Page i AECOM National Transport Authority Fingal / North Dublin Transport Study FINGAL / NORTH DUBLIN TRANSPORT STUDY STAGE ONE APPRAISAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Heavy Rail .............................................................................................................................. 8 3.0 Light Rail............................................................................................................................... 38 4.0 Bus Rapid Transit ................................................................................................................. 62 5.0 Combined Options................................................................................................................ 76 6.0 Appraisal Principles and Approach .....................................................................................
  • Rapidmts.Com

    Rapidmts.Com

    RapidMTS.com A New Level of Service Rapid is an exciting level of transit service that provides frequent trips along direct routes. Whether you’re headed to or from UC San Diego, SDSU, Downtown, or Escondido, Rapid is One Sweet Ride! SuperLoop Rapid routes 201, 202, and 204 provide high-frequency service in the north University City area, seven days a week, from 5:45 a.m. until 10 p.m. Vehicles operate every 10 minutes during peak commute hours and every 15 minutes at other times. SuperLoop Rapid connects to Rapid 237 at the Gilman Transit Center and Genesee Avenue/UTC. Mid-City Rapid 215 provides all-day service between SDSU and Downtown along El Cajon Boulevard and Park Boulevard, with service every 10 minutes during weekday peak hours, every 15 minutes during off-peak hours and all day on weekends, and every 30 minutes at night. Rapid 215 uses transit signal priority, dedicated transit lanes along a portion of Park Boulevard, and has limited stops to provide faster and more reliable service. Use Rapid 215 to connect with Rapid 235 at the El Cajon Boulevard Transit Plaza or to Trolley lines in Downtown San Diego. Rapid 235 operates seven days a week, 5 a.m. to 11 p.m., every 15 minutes during weekday rush hours and every 30 minutes during non-rush hours and on weekends. Rapid 235 provides a one-seat (no transfers) ride between the Escondido Transit Center and Downtown San Diego, with stops at Del Lago, Rancho Bernardo, Sabre Springs, Miramar College, Kearny Mesa (three stops on Clairemont Mesa Boulevard), City Heights (El Cajon Boulevard and University Avenue), and Downtown San Diego (along Broadway from City College to Santa Fe Depot).
  • Funding Local Public Transportation I. Metro A. SORTA, Early History In

    Funding Local Public Transportation I. Metro A. SORTA, Early History In

    Funding Local Public Transportation I. Metro A. SORTA, early history In 1969 the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority was established by Hamilton County with Hamilton County as its jurisdiCtion. In 1971 SORTA proposed a property tax levy to County voters whiCh was to be Coupled with matching funds from the federal government to be used to purChase CinCinnati Transit, InC. The proposal was the first of several unsuCCessful attempts (1971, 1979, and 1980) to seCure County-wide funding for the publiC transit system. In 1972-3 the City of CinCinnati suCCessfully proposed a Charter amendment on the ballot to raise the City earnings tax 0.3% for publiC transit purposes only, purChased the bus system and Contracted with SORTA to run the transit system. The most reCent attempt to widen the funding base was the 2002 Metro Moves proposal for a regional bus and rail system. It failed, although there was support from CinCinnati voters. B. SORTA, today SORTA is a tax-supported politiCal subdivision of the State of Ohio. SORTA is governed by a 13- member volunteer Citizens’ board of trustees. Seven trustees are appointed by the City of CinCinnati and six are appointed by Hamilton County Board of Commissioners. Trustees serve for three year terms. Hamilton County appoints three of its own trustees plus one each representing Butler, Clermont and Warren Counties. SORTA operates Metro fixed-route and ACCess paratransit serviCes in Hamilton County, in addition to providing Commuter routes from Butler, Clermont and Warren Counties. Bus serviCe is provided primarily in the City of CinCinnati and some areas in Greater CinCinnati.
  • Foothill Transit Title VI Compliance Review Final Report February 2016 Federal Transit Administration

    Foothill Transit Title VI Compliance Review Final Report February 2016 Federal Transit Administration

    Foothill Transit Title VI Compliance Review Final Report February 2016 Federal Transit Administration U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration Title VI Compliance Review, Foothill Transit Final Report February 2016 This page has been intentionally left blank to facilitate duplex printing Title VI Compliance Review, Foothill Transit Final Report February 2016 Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1 General Information ................................................................................................................................. 3 2 Jurisdiction and Authorities ..................................................................................................................... 5 3 Purpose and Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 7 3.2 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 7 4 Introduction to Foothill Transit ................................................................................................................ 9 4.1 Introduction to Foothill Transit Services and Organizational Structure .........................................
  • PC-16-063 Attachment 1

    PC-16-063 Attachment 1

    Attachment 1 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT I. INTRODUCTION The transportation of people in the University community, like all communities in the San Diego area, is highly dependent on the private automobile. The accommodation of these private automobile trips is the key constraint on development intensity in the community. Historically, the project application review process has emphasized the compatibility of proposed developments with traffic projections and anticipated street capacities. The relationship between generated traffic and available capacity has been, and will continue to be, a critical consideration in the development of the community. While it is expected that the private car will continue to be the principal means of transportation, it is also true that the land uses proposed by this Plan are of an intensity which could support a wide variety of transportation alternatives. Therefore, this Plan element also attempts to consider the components of a viable, balanced transportation system. Provisions must be made for pedestrians, bicycles, mass transit and other systems within the community. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Roads and Streets Figure 17 gives the location and daily volumes of the existing freeways and streets serving the University community. The existing system is operating adequately under current land use conditions. However, the presence of such regional generators such as UCSD, the University Towne Centre, hospitals and major medical-science-research centers, coupled with through traffic accessing the coast via La Jolla Village Drive and Genesee Avenue, hascenters has caused notable peak-hour congestion. No current designated truck routes exist in the community, with the exception of the truck access gate provided by UCSD from Regents Road.
  • Transdev Facts Cincinnati Streetcar

    Transdev Facts Cincinnati Streetcar

    Transdev Facts - Cincinnati Streetcar About Transdev Based in Lombard, IL, near Chicago, Transdev is the largest private-sector operator of multiple modes of transit in North America, including bus, rail, paratransit, shuttle, and sedan and taxi services. Globally, Transdev operates public transportation in 20 countries. The company is committed to being the trusted partner of cities, transit authorities and airports through quality execution and innovations in mobility. For more information, go to www.transdevna.com. Overall Experience and Qualifications Transdev Services, Inc. is a Maryland corporation with more than 100 years of experience in North America, delivering virtually every type of ground transportation services, including conventional fixed-route, paratransit, BRT, student transportation, university and airport shuttle, commuter rail, light rail, streetcar, taxicab and limousine service with over 18,000 employees and contracts in more than 200 locations across the U.S. Our experience spans a broad range of contract structures. These extend from traditional operations and maintenance contracts to management contracts that include functions traditionally performed by the public transit agency. For example, we have Public Private Operating Partnerships in two U.S. locations, Nassau County (Long Island, NY) and New Orleans, which include planning, scheduling marketing, purchasing, vehicle acquisition, grants management, customer service, communications, facility management and revenue-sharing features. We also have management-only contracts in which we manage public organizations and perform similar functions. 1 Transdev’s North American corporate headquarters is in Lombard, IL, a western suburb of Chicago. We have satellite offices in Washington, DC; Phoenix, AZ and Montreal, Quebec as well as experts in all key disciplines located across North America.
  • Service Evaluation Report

    Service Evaluation Report

    System and Service Evaluation January 2017 Prepared by: Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................6 Service Overview ........................................................................................................................9 Historical Context .......................................................................................................... 9 System Changes ...................................................................................................................... 11 Service Span and Frequencies ........................................................................................... 12 Access to Service ........................................................................................................ 13 Network Structure ............................................................................................................ 15 Other Mobility Services ..................................................................................................... 15 DecoBike ................................................................................................................................. 16 ZipCar ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Taxis, Jitneys, and Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) ............................................... 17 UC San Diego Campus Shuttles .............................................................................................