HomeMy Public PortalAbout06 June 28, 1983 Citizens' AdvisoryRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
040224
AGENDA
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Tuesday, June 28, 1983, 1:30 P.M.
Riverside City Hall
4th Floor Conference Room
3900 Main Street, Riverside 92522
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes.
3. Quarterly Report on Transit Operations.
4. Options to Restrict Able -Bodied Persons From Using
Demand Response Services When Fixed Route Service
is Available.
5. SB 821 Subcommittee.
6. Adjournment.
(INFO.)
(DISC./ACTION)
(ACTION)
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Minutes of Meeting No. 3-83
April 26, 1983-
1. Call to Order.
Since the Chairman and Vice Chairman were not present, the Committee
elected Herb Krauch as Chairman Pro Tem. The meeting was called to
order by Chairman Krauch at 1:39 p.m. on Tuesday, April 26, 1983 at the
Riverside City Hall, Fourth Floor Conference Room, 3900 Main Street,
Riverside.
Members present:
Marian Carpelan
Donna Crowe
Jo Huntley
Richard L. Jandt
Herb Krauch
Others present:
Lloyd O'Connell
Rena Parker
Earl Shade
Sheila Velez
Ken Kaufher, RTA Kay Van Sickel, RTA
Doug Marini, RTA
2. Approval of Minutes.
Dick Jandt stated that at the January 25, 1983 meeting, he made comments
regarding the congestion problem on Highway 111. He wanted to clarify
the he meant that the congestion problem has been "compounded by" rather
than "due to" the traffic signals installed by cities along the highway.
Sheila Velez complimented the Committee for discussing ways to educate
the younger generation to use public transit.
Rena Parker commented that with regards to educating youngsters on the use
of public transit, there was an article in the Corona paper about a pre-
school group touring a Corona dial -a -ride bus.
With no other comments to the minutes, Chairman Krauch declared the minutes
of the January 25, 1983 meeting approved as corrected and the minutes of
the February 22, 1983 meeting as submitted.
3. Election of Officers.
M/S/C (PARKER/VELEZ) to elect Dick Jandt as Chairman of the
Citizens Advisory Committee with the delayed seating until
August, 1983.
M/S/C (PARKER/SHADE) to elect Lloyd O'Connell as Vice Chairman
of the Citizens Advisory Committee with the delayed seating
until August, 1983.
CAC Minutes
April 26, 1983
Page 2
4. Short Range Transit Plan.
Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director, presented the FY 1984-88 Short Range
Transit Plans to the Committee. RCTC staff prepared the plans for the six
small operators (Beaumont, Banning, Corona, LETS, PVVTA, Riverside Special
Services) and RTA and SunLine prepared their own plans. The plans basically
propose a status quo service, continuing present level of service for the
next five years, and project minor increase in ridership. He then reviewed
each plan as follows:
Banning
Banning will continue the fixed route line which serves the area
north of I-10 and is proposing a second route to serve the area
south of I-10 by late 1983 or early 1984.
Beaumont
Beaumont will continue to operate dial -a -ride service five days
a week in the City and the unincorporated areas of Highland Springs
and Cherry Valley and run two trips/day to Yucaipa.
Corona
Corona will continue to operate dial -a -ride service six days/week
in the City and the unincorporated area of Home Gardens.
Riverside Special Services
Service for the elderly and handicapped will continue to be pro-
vided seven days/week. In response to the testimony received at the
unmet needs hearing, an additional van will be added during the peak
hours to serve the workshop program clients presently on a waiting
list.
LETS
The Lake Elsinore Transit System will continue to provide a fixed
route service six days a week in the City and the unincorporated
areas around the lake.
PVVTA
The Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency will continue to operate the
service exclusively for the handicapped five days/week under contract
with the Palo Verde Valley Association for the Handicapped.
SunLine Transit Agency
SunLine will continue to operate six fixed -route lines and four tel-
a-rides. A fixed route service increase on the intercity routes and
decreases in local Saturday service are being considered for FY 1985.
CAC Minutes
April 26, 1983
Page 3
SunLine is considering increasing frequencies on Lines 19 and 20 to
30 minutes and eliminating Saturday service in the local lines (Lines 1,
2, and 4) in FY 1985. Paul Blackwelder told the Committee that SunLine's
draft plan also proposes eliminating Line 1 in 1985. At the Commission
public hearing on unmet needs, testimony was received requesting rein-
statement of service to North Palm Springs. The Commission has identified
this as an unmet need and has requested SunLine to review its plan to
include a limited tel-a-ride service to North Palm Springs.
Barry Beck, Executive Director, informed the Committee that in reading
SunLine's staff report to their Board, they are suggesting that within
a year all local service be dropped and, thus, operate Lines 19 and 20
on a half hour service. He said that this was not included in SunLine's
plan and staff will need to clarify this matter with SunLine staff.
In response to Marian Carpelan's question whether the local lines referred
to are the tel-a-ride services, Barry Beck explained that the local lines
are fixed routes - Lines 1, 2 and 4. He added that it is his understanding
that Lines 1 and 2 have a fair degree of ridership.
Rena Parker commented that SunLine would just basically be running the back-
bone line if the local lines were eliminated.
Dick Jandt questioned the composition of ridership on Line 1 as the route
leads to affluent homes. He suggested that perhaps a study be done
determining the timeframe of ridership in order to identify who is using
Line 1.
Barry Beck said that this could be accomplished.
Riverside Transit Agency (Including Dial -A -Rides)
RTA will continue to operate all existing local and intercity fixed routes
at least through August, 1983. The proposed service changes are: (1) To
increase the weekday peak hour service on Lines 12, 13, 14 and 15; (2) To
add Sunday service to Line 16; (3) Replace the dial -a -ride service in
Rubidoux with a fixed -route service; (4) To monitor productivity on Lines
17, 21, and 30 and recommend continuation or deletion in September, 1983.
Unmet needs that were identified that require inclusion in the plan are:
(1) To implement a limited service for Cabazon residents for medical and
shopping purposes in Banning and to the local sernior center and nutrition
program; and, (2) To retain the implementation of a fixed -route line between
Corona and Norco contained in the existing plan, but that the implementation
date be pushed back to FY 1985-86.
Discussion ensued regarding Line 30 (Hemet local). It is the feeling of
RCTC staff that there is potential for the line but most of the transit
users continue to use the dial -a -ride service rather than the fixed route
line. Staff will review the dial -a -ride origins and destinations to deter-
mine the number of people that could use the fixed route line instead of
dial -a -ride.
5
CAC Minutes
April 26, 1983
Page 4
Ken Kaufher, RTA, explained that the original proposal for Line 30
included a band along the fixed route in which dial -a -ride service would
not be available. Those riders calling for dial -a -ride service with
origins and destinations within the band would be advised to use the
fixed route line. He said that the community members reviewing the pro-
posal were not agreeable to the proposal.
It was suggested by Committee members that perhaps the dial -a -ride fare
be increased and that persons requesting dial -a -ride service be encouraged
to use the fixed route line.
Dick Jandt asked, with regard to the proposed fixed route line between
Norco and Corona, why there is a resistance on the part of RTA to imple-
ment the line and how the determination was made that there would be an
insufficient number of riders to support the line.
Ken Kaufher responded that RTA had done a fairly detailed analysis which
indicated that there would not be enough demand to support the line. The
analysis was similar to that done in Rubidoux whereby they used the origins
and destinations of dial -a -ride riders.
Rena Parker asked RTA staff if they are equating the demand 6 Coron a f o r
(orco) dial -a -ride within Norco with the proposed demand for the fixed
route from Corona to Norco. She commented that this comparison would
not be valid because dial -a -ride service is currently provided three
days/week and does not serve riders who want a regular transit service.
She felt that RTA has not really looked adequately at the potential for
a fixed route to serve Corona and Norco.
Barry Beck stated that RTA staff has not done a complete technical analysis
on the route with regard to ridership but had only analyzed to the extent
to which it would serve existing dial -a -ride users.
Ken Kaufher commented that the proposed fixed route would start at the
Circle City Hospital and would serve the Corona Mall, Civic Center, Norco
and Swan Lake. He said that the ridership projection was based on the
expected number of passengers per mile of. service. The projected ridership
was then compared to similar type of route such as Line 21.
Doug Marini added that prior to the last service change, the Norco Bial-
a -ride service operated five times/day for five days/week to Corona and
averaged only one person per trip.
It was requested by Committee members to place on its next agenda for
further discussion options to encourage by able-bodied seniors to use
fixed route service in lieu of dial -a -ride.
4
CAC Minutes
April 26, 1983
Page 5
Sheila Velez asked if the fact that the Circle City Hospital no longer
takes in Medi-Cal and patients having to travel to Riverside instead has had
any affects on Line 1 ridership.
Rena Parker noted that on Page 23 of RTA's plan, it states that a fixed
route in Norco was not feasible to serve the current demand responsive
trips, but nowhere in the plan does it consider the demand for a fixed
route connecting Norco and Corona along Hamner and Main Streets.
Ken Kaufher reiterated that the proposed fixed route would have served
the two hospitals, a senior center, Corona Mall, the civic center, a
junior high school, a high school, the residential areas on Fourth and
Seventh Streets, and the commercial development along Hamner Avenue.
Doug Marini commented that the fact that there are no concentrations of
residential areas along Hamner Avenue decreases the potential to attract
riders to a fixed route service.
Barry Beck agreed that it is difficult to develop ridership because the
area is of high income and has dispurse population. But even though
there is aproblem with demographics, it is a judgment call by RTA staff
whether or not fixed route service would be feasible for the area. He
then told the Committee that staff's recommendation to the Commission
is to retain the proposed route in the plan but to push the implementation
date back two years. Perhaps with continued population growth and eventual
rise of gasoline prices, RTA staff will believe the line will be feasible
at a future date.
Sheila Velez suggested that perhaps RTA contact the shopping center in
Corona to institute some sort of a program where bus tickets could be
validated for some percentage in discount of the fare.
Ken Kaufher said that from RTA's experience with this kind of program,
the increase in ridership is marginal. He then told the Committee of a
similar program conducted at the Hemet Valley Mall in conjunction with
Line 27E service.
M/S/C (JANDT/PARKER) to request the Commission to support an
experimental fixed route service between Norco and Corona for
a period adequate to determine if there are sufficient riders
to support the service when demonstration funds become avail-
able.
M/S/C (PARKER/JANDT) to recommend Commission adoption of the
draft FY 1984-88 Riverside County Short Range Transit Plan
subject to the following conditions:
1. Implementation of limited tel-a-ride service to North Palm
Springs in FY 1984 is added to the SunLine Transit Agency
Short Range Transit Plan.
5
CAC Minutes
April 26, 1983
Page 6
2. Implementation of limited service for Cabazon in FY 1984
is added to the Riverside Transit Agency Short Range
Transit Plan.
3. Implementation of a Corona -Norco fixed route in FY 1986
is added to the Riverside Transit Agency Short Range
Transit Plan.
5. Transportation Improvement Program - Highway Element.
In response to Rena Parker's question whether improvements to the Canyon
Lake Road beyond Lake Elsinore are included in the program, Donna Crowe
said that improvements have already begun using special safety funds.
Barry Beck explained that the program contains a wish list of projects
but that it is hoped the County would be allotted the full amount for
Route 86 improvements. He said that Caltrans District 11 in Imperial
County has proposed a few large projects but the safety problems are in
Riverside County.
Dick Jandt stated that the improvements will be built on a new alignment
which will bypass the populated area of Coachella. This is important
as Westmorland is a waste dumpsite and that it is under consideration
farbeing upgraded to a higher level.
Rena Parker asked why the improvements to Route 86 are not scheduled
until 1988.
Barry Beck explained that the project will not be ready until that time.
Another environmental report may be neeaed for Route 86 as the one done
previously may no longer be acceptable.
6. Additional Item.
Ken Kaufher introduced Kay Van Sickel to the Committee. Kay is RTA's
new Marketing and Planning Manager and has prepared RTA's marketing plan
and budget. He offered a presentation of RTA's marketing plan for the up-
coming year to be placed on the next agenda for information and discussion.
7. Adjournment.
The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 31, 1983 at 1:30 p.m. at
the Riverside City Hall, 4th Floor Conference Room, 3900 Main Street,
Riverside.
M/S/C (JANDT/VELEZ) to adjourn the meeting at 3:05 p.m.
Re pectfully submitted,
RA -14402-(2---'
Paul Blackwelder
Assistant Director
nk
AGENDA ITEM Np. 3
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TO: Citizens Advisory Committee
FROM: Barry Beck, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Quarterly Report on Transit Operations
Attached are a table and graphs showing transit operations data for the
period July 1, 1982 through December 31, 1982. Countywide transit ridership
decreased by 4,7% or 89,201 passengers during the July -December period of
1982 compared to the same period in 1981. The most significant declines in
ridership occurred in dial -a -ride services. RTA dial -a -ride ridership
declined by 30.2% or 45,720 passengers and SunLine tel-a-ride ridership
declined by 23.7% or 4,877 passengers. It is important to note that although
total SunLine ridership declined, the number of fare paying passengers in-
creased because route restructuring in January reduced the need to transfer
between routes. Ridership changes for the first half of FY 1982 and FY 1983
are shown below:
1ST HALF IST HALF
OPERATOR FY '82 FY '83 CHANGE CHANGE
RTA 1,274,492 1,185,499 -88,993 - 7.0%
SunLine 315,644 304,883 -10,761 - 3.4%
Banning 24,485 29,229 + 4,744 +19.4%
Beaumont 13,263 21,838 + 8,575 +64.7%
Corona 34,039 32,429 - 1,610 - 4.7%
LETS 35,851 35,889 + 38 + 0.:1%
Riv. Spec. Svcs. 51,484 56,208 + 4,724 + 9.2%
PVVTA 1,571 1,653 + 82 + 5.2%
TOTAL 1,750,829 1,667,628 -83,201 - 4.2%
Fare revenue to operating expense ratios generally increased during the first
half of FY 1983 compared to FY 1982. The increases were due to fare increases
enacted by RTA and SunLine. Fare revenues as a percentage of operating ex-
penses for each operator for the period July -December 1981 and 1982 are shown
below:
OPERATOR FY 1982 FY 1983
RTA 16.3% 17.7%
SunLine 13.4% 17.0%
Banning 25.0% 23.5%
Beaumont 16.0% 24.0%
Corona 20.0% 20.0%
LETS 14.0% 11.6%
Riv. Spec. Svcs. 11.0% 12.1%
PVVTA 9.7% 20.6%
BB/PB:nk
Attachments
Agenda Item No..3
June 28, 1933
Do
TRANSIT OPERATIONS REPORT
JULY 1, 1982 -DECEMBER 31, 1982
TOTAL PASSENGERS
Fixed -Route
Dial -A -Ride
GROSS OPER EXPENSES
Fixed -Route
Dial -A -Ride
FARE REVENUE
% of Oper. Exp.
NET EXP. /PASSENGER
Fixed -Route
Dial -Ride
AVG. PASS. /VEH. HR.
Fixed -Route
Dial -A -Ride
GROSS COST/VEH. HR.
Fixed -Route
Dial -A -Ride
RTA SUNLINE
1,185,499 304,883
1,079,632 289,145
91% 95%
105,867 15,738
9% 5%
$2,606,571 $922,531
$2,028,576 $789,926
77.8% 86%
$ 577,995 $132,605
22.2% 14%
$ 461,777 $156,454
17.7% 17%
$ 1.51
$ 4.82
20.21
4. 98
$37. 99
$27.17
BANNING LETS
'29,229 35,889
29,229 35,889
100% 100%
$34,039 $72,500
$34,039 $72,500
RIVERSIDE
BEAUMONT CORONA SPEC SVCS
21,838 32,429 56,208
21,838 32,429 56,208
100% 100% 100%
$50,699 $140,301 $236,424
$50,699 $140,301 $236,424
$ 7,987 $ 8,431 $12,443 $ 28,051 $ 28,544
23.5% 11.6% 24% 20% 12.1%
$ 2.68 $ 0.89 $ 1.79
$ 7. 92
12.5
4.05
$34.27
$34. 15
16. 0
9.31
-$18.64 $18. 81
$ 1 .75 $ 3 .45 $ 3 .70
8.29 5 .69
5.19
PVVTA TOTAL
1,653 1,667,62
1,653
100%
$7,975
$7,975
$1,646
20.6%
$ 3.83
2.51
$19.25 $24.64 $21.84 $12.12
1,433,89
86
233,73
14
$4,071,04
$2,925,04
71.8
$1,145,99
28.2
$ 705,33
RIDERS IN 100,000's
i
I
J
i 4
I
5
L
7
8
_
6
:"--.."*----%'-..›.:."---:-.---.1/4.`"--:------ ,,
' ''.'"-:-:---.1."---:."-----'-'1. 5°2,829
. -7:" ,:-.,.. .:-..,:-.. ...,:-...„:-..,,,i--,,,,---„, ..:----,,
�__�547,0
_'
-"--C�����������_�
�� 516,699
N
w
w
w
N
i�-�.�,�_��.�
602,449
w
"...,,,_ ���',,,,,N-,,,,����'-,,,:'-.<_��
642,450
A '`"--���:%"--.��-----<�������>-:--,
651,735
_��������_���_�_,�
57
, 639
��������
-.'...,..:"-...,..:---,,,--,,,��627,874
3
N
:rci3),
.
41
���_>��_��
�---,„:-..,��
650,444
������_�����l'-'' .`•
�` 640,068
J
C_���---
�---��--:"-!
,596,654
o
.°'
N
J
w
N
N
�NN,,„›,,.
` 668,641
614,996
,.,
w
A
���_���_�_��_* ---._�"--..„
���������,_��__
623,904
��_�����
558,030
0
a
N
627,469
�_
J��_��.
"
"
V
C O
t o
V
t D
0 3
0
R I D E R S I N 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 ' s
3 4
L k )
1 5 5 , 4 7 7
\ \ \ \ \ 2 0 5 , 7 1 5
2 2 5 , 3 6 3
2 0 6 , 2 8 5
\ \ \ \ 1 5 5 , 9 7 7
o \ \ \ \ \ \ ��- 2 1 0 , 8 9 2
2 w
1 5 0 ,
1 6 5
2 2 5 , 1 2 4
x
0 3
w
0 3
5 6 4
8 3 8
� N � w
3 9 , 5 1 1
o o
c o
4 3 c o
\ ��\ \ 1 4 1 , 8 7 6
A 3 N 3 9 V i I S N d b l 3 N I 1 N f S
�� c
- < " - 1
;
m
7 0
2
R I D E R S I N 1 0 , 0 0 0 ' s
3 4
5 6 7
8 9
w
V
C O
V
` � 6 , 8 8 8
t 0
C O
8 , 3 1 6
N
9 , 0 8 0
9 , 0 0 7
1 0 , 2 0 6
1 0 , 8 2 2
w N - ���� 1 0 , 2 5 6
O D
1 0 , 6 7 8 -
1 2 , 7 9 8
1 2 , 3 2 8
s 2 1 2 , 1 5 7
c o
N
1 3 , 2 6 3
1 5 , 1
C � " 1 4 , 0 4
1
O D
6
7 0
0
v ��
BEAUMONT DIAL -A -RIDE
RIDERSHIP
RIDERS IN 10,000's
QUARTER
F.Y.
ors
N
15,328 20,685 31,899 N 01
CO O
^ LC)
- r
CO Ol r O
Ol Ol l0 r
L N N ^
M r .- ,- r CO
CO N Cr �}' lfl r r ^
Lf) Ol Cr) O l0 CT) ^ N.
CO Cr) Ol CO CO Lf) l0 l0 I
N d• LC') v-2 z I 7/
/
, 7/ , ,
N M Cr) ; // J//
ra P 1 7 A
3 1 4 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3! 4 1 I2 3 I4
70_70 7o_Rn stn_sti R1 -R? 82-83
.12
.12
v
w
00
l0 A
2
RIDERS IN 10,000's
22,831
3 4 5 CT
1 I 1
V
lD
23,380
22,290
21,259
o 19,814
W 19,414
17
299
00
CA)
N
00
J
00
N W
42.
16
17
740
987
480
rn
00
01
01
00
N
07
W W
16,-342
15,
37
3GII-V-IVIG VN0b00
LAKE ELSINORE TRANSIT SYSTEM
RIDERSHIP
0
0
0
0
r
N
CC
W
1-i
QUARTER
F.Y.
La-)
IC)
CD
N
3 1 4
78-79
50,699
LID
r --
J
2 1 3 14
79-80
65,890
N N
N 01 M
N ct
▪ I
LA
✓
2 3
80-81
4
75,093
12 3
81-82
O
r
rt
N
I
1
2 3
82-83
RIVERSIDE SPECIAL SERVICES
E & H PROGRAM
RIDERSHIP
Lf)
QUARTER
F.Y.
107,660
3 14
78-79
CO
0)
f
2 H 1 4
79-80
0i
C71
104,352
(ID
Lf)
Z
1.0
LC)
M
O
to
Lf)
N
105,285
0)
0)
0)
LC)
N
2
Z
3
80-81
4
I
2 3
81-82
N
O
cC
N
4
I
D
ct
Lf)
0)
N
II
12
3
82-83
/3-
PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY
RIDERSHIP
30,866 21,089 3,200
0
cc
tt
N
N
O
O
►-1
V)
CC
W
CL
1-0
Gt
N
r--
QUARTER 3 14
F.Y. 78-79
79-80
3
4
O
N
Cr)
L0
1 ,2 1 3 I
80-81
LC)
l0
N
N
CJ
2 1 3
81-82
4
M
CO
82-83
ITEM NO. 14
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TO: Citizens Advisory Committee
FROM: Barry Beck, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Options to Restrict Able -Bodied Persons From Using Demand Response
Services When Fixed Route Service is Available
At the last meeting, the Committee discussed the high cost of demand response
service on a per passenger basis compared to fixed route service. Assuming
that operating expenses for demand response service could be reduced if able-
bodied persons used available capacity on fixed route buses rather than conti-
nuing to use dial -a -ride services, the Committee requested that staff present
various options to encourage able-bodied persons currently using dial -a -ride
to use fixed route services. The information below has been prepared for con-
sideration by the Committee.
There are presently two areas in Riverside County in which both local fixed
route and dial -a -ride services are operated. In the City of Riverside, RTA
operates fixed route service within 4 mile of approximately 70% of all resi-
dents. The City of Riverside operates a demand -response service for the
elderly and handicapped. In the Hemet -San Jacinto area, RTA operates a single
fixed route and a dial -a -ride open to the general public. In both areas, it is
apparent that a number of trips taken on dial -a -ride could be served by the
fixed -route systems.
Riverside Special Services ridership for FY 1983 is estimated at 112,000
passengers with operating expenses estimated at $487,000. Of the total rider-
ship, 61,000 (54%) are handicapped and 51,000 are elderly. Hemet -San Jacinto,
dial -a -ride ridership is estimated at 96,000 with operating expenses estimated
at $447,000. Of the total ridership, 4,000 are handicapped, 50,000 are elderly,
and 46,000 are general public or students. For the two systems combined,
annual ridership is 208,000 of which 65,000 (31%) are handicapped.
The Riverside Special Services Program has made it a policy to inform riders
who could use fixed route service of the availability of that service and the
lower fare. The dispatcher provides schedule information forjthe appropriate
route and offers to mail a schedule to the caller. If the ca ler does not
want to use the fixed route service then demand response service is provided.
In general, response to this effort has not been very positive and very few
riders have opted for using the fixed route., Two possible factors in the
reluctance to make the change to fixed route are that riders on the Special
Services Program are generally satisfied with the more personal door to door
service, and the $0.45 fare is generally not considered excessive.
There are basically two methods available for limiting demand for dial -a -ride
services when fixed route service is available. The first method is to limit
eligibility for service. The second method is to increase dial -a -ride fares.
Agenda Item No. 4
June 28, 1983
Options Page 2
I. Limit Eligibility
The most common method for limiting demand for demand -response service
is to limit eligibility to selected groups. The typical groups used to
identify transit ridership are:
Full Fare Students
Elderly Children
Handicapped
To date in Riverside County, restricting eligibility to elderly and
handicapped persons or only to handicapped persons has been done for the
entire demand response service area such as the City of Riverside or the
City of Palm Springs.
A further limitation on eligibility for the elderly and handicapped
service in Riverside could be used to reduce demand. Service requested
for by non -handicapped persons for trips with an origin and destination
within 4 mile of a fixed route could be restricted from using the service.
This system could also be used in the Hemet -San Jacinto area, Restriction
in this manner would eliminate the choice between services.
II, Fares and Surcharges
Dial -a -ride fares are presently about twice as high as fixed route fares.
The higher fares are charged because the cost per passenger for dial -a -ride
are higher than for fixed route. Fares have not been used to intentionally
limit demand although in most dial -a -ride systems as fares have increased,
demand has decreased. When fixed route and dial -a -ride services are both
available, demand for dial -a -ride could be limited by increasing the fare.
A general fare increase would limit overall demand including demand by
handicapped persons unable to use fixed route service. A more effective
way to limit demand from non -handicapped persons would be to initiate a
surcharge. A surcharge of $0.50 for trips by able-bodied persons with
fixed route service available would increase the dial -a -ride fare to 3 or
4 times the fixed route fare. The 4 mile service area for fixed routes
could be used to determine the surcharge area. All trips with an origin
and destination within 4 mile of a fixed route would require a surcharge
unless the rider was handicapped.
The Committee should consider two issues at its meeting. First, what role
should dial -a -ride service play in the total transportation system? The methods
listed above for reducing demand should be considered only if dial -a -ride is
to be operated as a back-up system to the fixed -route systems or where fixed
route service is not feasible. Second, how willing will the transit operators
be to implement either the service restriction or surcharge options if current
dial -a -ride users will complain? The most vocal group opposing such a change
will be the non -handicapped elderly dial -a -ride users.
BBjPB:nk
ITEM NO, 5
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TO: Citizens Advisory Committee
FROM: Barry Beck, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Ad Hoc Bikeway (SB 821) Subcommittee
Under State law, 2% of the total Transportation Development Act funds in
the County is set aside for bicycle and pedestrian facility projects.
This year, $180,000 is available for funding selected projects.
Each year at this time, bicycle and pedestrian facility project applica-
tions are requested from local agencies. The projects are then priori-
tized by the Ad Hoc Subcommittee using the attached SB 821 Evaluation
Criteria and recommended for funding to the Commission.
Letters are being sent to all eligible agencies requesting applications.
The Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees must each appoint three
members to the Ad Hoc Committee.
RECOMMENDATION
Appoint three members to the Ad Hoc Bikeway Subcommittee.
BB/PB:nk
Attachment
0
Agenda Item No. 5
June 28, 1983
S.. X21 EVALUATION CRITERIA
FACTOR
1. USE
The extent of potential use of a bicycle or pedestrian
facility should be the most important factor. Emphasis
of this factor helps ensure the greatest benefits will
be derived from the expenditure of SB 821 funds. Rel-
ative usage would be derived from analysis of number of
trip generators and attractors adjacent to the project.
2. SAFETY
Points would be awarded on the basis of a project's
potential to correct current safety problems.
3e IMPORTANCE AS TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE
Points would be awarded on the basis of a project's
potential to attract users who would otherwise use
an automobile.
4. MISSING LINK OR EXTENSION
Points would be awarded to projects that linked exist-
ing facilities or were extensions of existing facil-
ities.
5. MATCHING FUNDS
This factor would be used to help ensure that there is
local funding for a project - not just an application
for "free" money. One point would be awarded for each
five percent of total project cost that would be financed
by the local agency.
6. POPULATION EQUITY
The purpose of this factor would be to help ensure that
one agency does not receive all funds. The applicant
would receive the maximum ten points if the amount of
funds requested did not exceed what the applicant would
receive if the funds were allocated by population. Year
to year totals would be recorded so that an applicant
could build up a "credit".
MAXIMUM
POINTS
35
20
15
10
10
10