HomeMy Public PortalAbout01 January 26, 2016 Citizens Advisory
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/
SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
TIME: 11:30 a.m.
DATE: Tuesday, January 26, 2016
LOCATION: County of Riverside Administrative Center
Conference Room A
4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA 92501
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Pamela Brown, City of Riverside Human Relations Commission, Riverside
Maria De Los Santos, 2-1-1 Riverside Connect / VetLink, Riverside County
Joe Forgiarini, Riverside Transit Agency, Western Riverside County
Laura Hernandez, T-Now, Southwest Riverside County
Jack Marty, Retired Citizen, Banning
Priscilla Ochoa, Blindness Support Services, Western Riverside County
Linda Samulski, Guide Dogs of the Desert, Coachella Valley
Richard Smith, Independent Living Partnership, Riverside County
Mary Venerable, Retired Citizen, Perris
Beverly Barr-Ford, SunLine Transit Agency, Coachella Valley
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSIT OPERATORS
City of Banning
City of Beaumont
City of Corona
City of Riverside
Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency
Riverside County Transportation Commission – Commuter Rail
Riverside Transit Agency
SunLine Transit Agency
STAFF
John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director
Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director
Josefina Clemente, Transit Manager
Martha Durbin, Management Analyst
Jessica Villa, Administrative Assistant
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/
SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
www.rctc.org
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
11:30 a.m.
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Conference Room A
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need
special assistance to participate in a Committee meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at
(951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that
reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – SEPTEMBER 24, 2015
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the agenda after making a
finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came
to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action
adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than
2/3 of the Committee members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a
unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.)
6. 2016 PUBLIC TRANSIT – HUMAN SERVICES TRANSPORTATION COORDINATED PLAN
UPDATE
Overview
This item is for the Committee to receive a presentation on the 2016 Public Transit –
Human Services Transportation Coordination Plan for Riverside County.
Citizens Advisory Committee/
Social Services Transportation Advisory Council
January 26, 2016
Page 2
7. RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE
REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013/14
Overview
This item is for the Committee to receive and file a presentation on the Riverside County
Public Transportation: Annual Countywide Performance Report for Fiscal Year 2013/14.
8. COMMITTEE MEMBER / STAFF REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Committee Members and staff to report on
attended and upcoming meetings/conferences and issues related to Committee
activities.
9. ADJOURNMENT
The next Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Council
meeting is scheduled to be held at 11:30 a.m., Thursday, May 26, 2016, at a location to
be determined.
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
crTrzENs ADVTSoRY coMM TTTEE/
SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
Minutes
September 24,2015
1. CALL TO ORDER
Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director, called the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social
Services Transportation Advisory Council to order at 11:35 a.m. at the Sunline Transit
Agency office, 32-505 Harry OliverTrail, Thousand Palms, California 92276.
2. ROLL CALL
Members Present
Pamela Brown
Miguel Duran
Joe Forgiarini
Priscilla Ochoa
Linda Samulski
Richard Smith
Mary Venerable
Beverly Barr-Ford
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Members Absent
Laura Hernandez
Jack Marty
There were no public comments.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes for the September 18,2OL4 meeting were approved as submitted.
s. ADDTTTONS/REVTSTONS
There were no additions/revisions to the agenda.
6. PUBLIC TRANSIT 101 FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY
John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, gave a presentation on the Commission's role in
Riverside County and an overview of existing public transportation.
CAC Member Mary Venerable asked what rail raght of way maintenance entails. John
Standiford stated maintenance can include crossing arm, track, and signal maintenance as
well as weed abatement. CAC Member Venerable further inquired about any outreach
Citizens Advisory Committee/
Social Services Transportation Advisory Council
September 24,2015
Page 2
7.
efforts to inform the public on the maintenance responsibilities that come with extending
rail services. John Standiford stated educating the public on those responsibilities is a
priority.
CAC Member Richard Smith inquired about the Commission's position on the city of Moreno
Valley's World Logistics Center and the impact to transit throughout that portion of
Riverside County. John Standiford responded the Commission filed a lawsuit against the
environmental impact report for that development project.
PRESENTATION OF RIVERSIDE COUNW RAIL SERVICES
Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager, provided an update on the new Metrolink extension to the
city of Perris, also known as the Perris Valley Line project. The goal is to start service by the
end of the year; however, the exact date is not definite. Once operational, 12 trains will
provide service Monday through Friday. At this time, no weekend service is scheduled.
Sheldon Peterson provided a brief presentation on Operation Life Saver and the efforts
made to educate students at local schools on rail safety. CAC Member Venerable requested
Operation Life Saver educational materials be provided so she can distribute to the Perris
Municipal Advisory Council.
Robert Yates provided a presentation on the planning feasibility for an intercity rail
connection between the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles Union Station, known as the
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study. The goal of the project is to provide
an alternative transit service for commuters to and from the Coachella Valley.
CAC Member Smith asked how ridership is projected for the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio
Pass Rail Corridor Study. Robert Yates stated the Amtrak model is used to predict ridership.
CAC Member Linda Samulski asked when the project is scheduled to begin. Robert Yates
informed the committee service is projected to begin in seven years and advocacy is the
best way for CAC members to expedite the process.
THE FTSCAL YEAR 2015/16 CAC MEETTNGS AND OppORTUNtTtES FOR CAC MEMBER TNPUT
Fina Clemente, Transit Manager, informed members the next meeting will take place on
January 26,2016, at t1:30 a.m. at the Riverside County Transportation Commission Office,
4080 Lemon Street, 3'd Floor, Conference Room A, Riverside, California 92501. The
foflowing meeting will be on May 26,2OL6, tentatively scheduled in Beaumont.
The January meeting agenda will include planning for future meetings and the presentation
of the Annual Public Transit Report. CAC members will also have the opportunity to provide
input on the Coordinated Public Transit - Human Services Transportation Plan Update. The
8.
Citizens Advisory Committee/
Social Services Transportation Advisory Council
September 24, 2015
Page 3
May agenda will include the presentation of the draft Coordinated Public Transit — Human
Services Transportation update as well as presentations from transit operators on their
proposed FY 2016/17 budgets and Short Range Transit Plans.
Robert Yates informed CAC members the Commission will be holding countywide
workshops from January through March to obtain information for regional transportation
planning. CAC members were asked for their participation by identifying groups and
citizens to invite to the meetings and provide their input. CAC members were instructed to
forward any stakeholder input to the Commission.
CAC Member Smith stated outreach efforts need to go beyond organized groups within the
county, specifically the residents who are most affected.
9. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND INFORMATION
CAC Member Smith distributed transportation guides and recommended other members
refer people to the Office on Aging for transportation resources and education.
10. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social
Services Transportation Advisory Council, the meeting adjourned at 1:32 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
c
Fina Clemente
Transit Manager
AGENDA ITEM 6
A presentation will be made;
there is no attachment to
agenda item 6.
AGENDA ITEM 7
Agenda Item 7
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 26, 2016
TO: Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Council
FROM: Martha Durbin, Management Analyst
THROUGH: Josefina Clemente, Transit Manager
SUBJECT: Riverside County Public Transportation: Annual Countywide Performance
Report for Fiscal Year 2013/14
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to receive and file the Riverside County Public Transportation
Annual Countywide Performance Report (Countywide Report) for Fiscal Year 2013/14.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Transportation funding in the state is governed by the Transportation Development Act (TDA).
In order for the Commission to annually approve funding, the TDA requires the Commission to
have a formal process in place to review and evaluate transit operator productivity and
performance. As such, staff annually produces the report and submits it to the Commission for
its review and comment. The attached FY 2013/14 Countywide Report was approved by the
Commission in July 2015.
DISCUSSION:
The FY 2013/14 Countywide Report continues a comprehensive performance reporting
program for Riverside County with the goal of documenting how public transit funding was
spent and the results achieved for the dollars invested. A recap of the results presented in the
FY 2013/14 Countywide Report is as follows: 1) the overall countywide farebox recovery was
23.3 percent; 2) trips per capita rate of 7.3 was achieved; 3) a total of $61.5 million in state and
local resources were available to support the county’s operators; and 4) the total trips provided
were 16.4 million.
The Countywide Report links other Commission efforts to provide a big picture of how transit
funding works in Riverside County. For example, the Commission’s Public Transit – Human
Services Transportation Coordinated Plan for Riverside County (Coordinated Plan) completed
every four years provides direction on the use of scarce funding resources in Riverside County.
The Countywide Report links to the Coordinated Plan by identifying the financial resources
available to transit operators and analyzes what was the result of the funding provided.
Furthermore, on an annual basis, the Commission conducts transit needs public hearings and
input gathered is incorporated into the Coordinated Plan, which ultimately points the
Agenda Item 7
Commission and the transit operators to areas where transit is in demand. Transit operators
then begin to plan and set a budget for the year. The operators’ plans are found in the Short
Range Transit Plans (SRTP), which encompasses the ongoing activities, new service (dependent
upon funding available and identified transit service needs), and budgets for each transit
operator. At the end of each fiscal year, the operators are audited and the Commission
compiles the information and documents in the Countywide Report how the funding was spent
for that year and evaluates performance measures compared to the previous year’s
performance.
The public transit measures reported in the FY 2013/14 Countywide Report were generally
positive and overall represented good news for the Commission and the transit operators.
Sufficient resources were identified and service is generally available to support the mobility of
Riverside County residents. Service is also identified as being operated in a cost effective
manner although more emphasis can be placed by the operators in addressing better farebox
return. The metrics and conclusions are more fully described in the attached FY 2013/14
Countywide Report. Work on the FY 2014/15 Countywide Report is now in process pending
completion of the FY 2014/15 TDA financial audit reports.
Attachment: Riverside County Public Transportation: Annual Countywide Performance Report
FY 2013/14
..
Riverside County
Public Transportation:
Annual Countywide
Performance Report,
FY 2013/14
Riverside County
Transportation Commission
Robert J. Yates
Multimodal Services Director
June 2015
Prepared by:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
ii | P a g e
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT,
FY 2013/2014
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1
Recent Transit and Transportation-Related Initiatives in Riverside County ................................................ 1
Perris Valley Line ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Coachella Rail Planning Effort .................................................................................................................. 2
Riverside Transit Agency’s “Comprehensive Operational Analysis” ........................................................ 2
SunLine Transit Agency’s “Focused Comprehensive Operational Analysis” ........................................... 3
Other Transportation-Related Initiatives ................................................................................................. 3
Performance Reporting Purposes ................................................................................................................ 5
Into the Measures ........................................................................................................................................ 6
1. Policy and Compliance ..................................................................................................................... 6
2. Utilization ........................................................................................................................................ 8
3. Accessibility and Coverage ............................................................................................................ 11
4. Connectivity .................................................................................................................................. 17
5. Resources ...................................................................................................................................... 18
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 20
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................. 23
Appendix A – Definitions, Data Sets, and References ........................................................................... 24
Appendix B – Public Transportation Trips Provided, All Modes ............................................................ 25
Appendix C – Bus Stop Location Counts by Operator and Revised FY 2012/13 Table 7 ....................... 26
Appendix D – Public Transit Fleet Size Over Three Years ...................................................................... 31
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
iii | P a g e
List of Figures
FIGURE 1 - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION BENEFITS ...................................................................................................... 4
FIGURE 2 – RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY – 74% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE ...................................... 12
FIGURE 3 – SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY - 81% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE ........................................ 13
FIGURE 4 – CORONA CRUISER - 73% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE ..................................................... 14
FIGURE 5 – PASS TRANSIT - 84% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE ......................................................... 15
FIGURE 6 – PALO VERDE VALLEY - 72% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE ................................................. 16
FIGURE 7 – HISTORY OF ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS BY MODE .................................................................................. 22
List of Tables
TABLE 1 – COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT, AUDITED FAREBOX RECOVERY, FY 2013/14 – 23.3% ....... 7
TABLE 2 – PUBLIC TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA, FY 2013/14 ...................................................................................... 9
TABLE 3 – TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA FOR OTHER AREAS, BUS BOARDINGS ONLY ........................................................ 10
TABLE 4 – BUS AND RAIL TRANSFER LOCATION COUNTS FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY .......................................................... 17
TABLE 5 – PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION RESOURCES IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY: COMMISSION ALLOCATED STATE AND LOCAL TRANSIT
FUNDING, VEHICLES AND VEHICLE REVENUE MILES .................................................................................. 19
TABLE 6 – SUMMARY OF COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................... 21
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
1 | P a g e
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT,
FY 2013/2014
INTRODUCTION
The Riverside County Annual Countywide Performance Report, FY 2013/14 (Countywide Report) is
prepared to assure compliance by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) with Public
Utilities Code Section 99244 which, through the Transportation Development Act (TDA), requires county
transportation planning agencies to monitor transit provider performance.
The Countywide Report continues a comprehensive, countywide public transportation performance
reporting program begun last fiscal year for Riverside County with the goal of documenting how public
transit funding was spent and what have been the results of Riverside County transit dollars invested.
Building upon last year’s baseline measurements, this Countywide Report considers two time frames
which are FY 2012/13 and FY 2013/14 and also highlights new initiatives during the recent calendar year to
improve the mobility of Riverside County residents. Transit provider experience for the reporting year FY
2013/14 in relation to five performance measures is reported. These recent initiatives are presented in the
subsection immediately following and experience against the reporting year FY 2013/14 follows
subsequently, describing a number of positive impacts.
RECENT TRANSIT AND TRANSPORTATION-RELATED INITIATIVES IN
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PERRIS VALLEY LINE
RCTC has moved steadily towards the opening of the Perris Valley Line (PVL). This rail service between
downtown Riverside and Perris adds 24 miles to the Metrolink network and four new stations. These
stations include Riverside Hunter Park, Moreno Valley/March Field, Downtown Perris, and South Perris.
The PVL will provide greater access to Southern California’s commuter rail network for residents in
Menifee, Murrieta, Temecula, San Jacinto, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, and Wildomar, and is expected to
open to riders by late 2015. Projected FY 2015/16 annual operating expenses are $14 million for all of
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
2 | P a g e
RCTC’s rail operations, representing a 43% increase to RCTC over its previously required state and local
subsidy to Metrolink and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority.
COACHELLA RAIL PLANNING EFFORT
RCTC, with the communities of the Coachella Valley and the San Gorgonio Pass area, initiated a
Coachella intercity rail feasibility study during the 2014 year to examine the potential for Amtrak rail service
between the Coachella Valley and downtown Los Angeles’ Union Station.
RCTC is funding this planning effort through Phase I, which identifies the purpose and need of the
proposed rail service, identifies alternatives that address the purpose and need, and performs an initial
evaluation of the alternatives. A Federal Rail Administration (FRA) grant has been awarded to Caltrans and
RCTC to support Phase II, which will involve preparation of a Service Development Plan and a program-level
Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report in accordance with FRA guidelines. These
are each critical steps to establishing a new rail service and providing new transportation service to connect
the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles.
RCTC supported the Phase I planning activities at a level of $1.7 million, and the Phase II analysis is
expected to cost just over $4 million. Almost $3 million will be coming from the FRA grant to be matched
by RCTC with $1.1 million from local sources.
RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY’S “COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS”
Over the past two years, Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) has conducted a major, system-wide
Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) that will bring about significant changes to RTA’s public transit
services in Western Riverside County. This planning effort, culminating in a Ten-Year Transit Network Plan,
was funded with local transit funds to provide a framework ensuring RTA’s transit services are productive
and responsive to Riverside County residents’ mobility needs.
Service Related Recommendations
Numerous planned changes are expected to improve and increase transit service levels across Western
Riverside County that include recent FY 2014/15 changes to RTA’s highest ridership services (such as Routes
1, 3, 15, 16, 19, 22, 27, 29, 49, and 74) in cities such as Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley, Perris, Lake
Elsinore, Hemet, San Jacinto, and Jurupa Valley to provide significant weekday and/or weekend frequency
improvements with service increased to every 15, 30, or 60 minutes.
Further planned changes during FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17 include:
Existing Routes 7 and 8 in Lake Elsinore and Wildomar will be restructured as a bi-directional
loop route, with an extension of Route 23 further into Wildomar to connect with the new loop
route;
Bus service changes to feed new Perris Valley Line stations: including two new routes, extra
trips on existing routes, and schedule revisions for connecting to/from train at:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
3 | P a g e
o Hunter Park Station (Riverside): Existing Route 13 and new Route 52 (to UC Riverside),
o Moreno Valley/March Field: Existing Route 20 and new 26 (to Orange Crest and Moreno
Valley Mall),
o Downtown Perris: Existing Routes 19, 22, 27, 30, 74, 208, and 212, and
o South Perris: Existing Routes 61 and 7;
In January 2017, new RapidLink limited stop service is slated to be launched every 15 minutes
during peak periods on weekdays between UC Riverside and Corona via University and
Magnolia Avenues; and
Two new CommuterLink peak period express routes are planned, using the SR-91 Freeway to
link Temecula to Orange County, the Village at Orange, and Riverside to Orange County in
Anaheim.
New Downtown Riverside and Vine Street Metrolink Rail Station bus stop improvements are planned, in
conjunction with the closure of the existing downtown transit terminal.
The RapidLink service will be funded by a $9.2 million award of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
(AQMD) funds, which were approved through RCTC’s multi-funding call for projects in 2014.
SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY’S “FOCUSED COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS”
SunLine Transit Agency has initiated a Focused Comprehensive Operational Analysis to develop a long-
range plan for the purpose of growing system-wide ridership. Last undertaken in 2005, SunLine anticipates
receiving the recommendations of this significant planning effort during the spring of 2016.
Implementation of SunLine Board-approved recommendations will follow in two-year phases, over a ten-
year horizon, to improve transit services throughout the Coachella Valley.
OTHER TRANSPORTATION-RELATED INITIATIVES
Active Transportation
Active Transportation is the term for non-motorized initiatives supporting bicycle and pedestrian safety
projects. They often involve establishing bike lanes or cyclist facilities and making pedestrian safety
improvements to sidewalks, crosswalks, signalization, and roadway medians.
Active Transportation projects seek to improve the cyclist and pedestrian experience. These
improvements also help to make the first and last mile connections safer and easier for transit users who
are themselves pedestrians and often bicyclists.
Increased walking and biking is supported by various parties, including the California Department of
Transportation which has established a new policy of tripling bicycle use and doubling pedestrian and
transit trips by 2020. Public health spokespersons have identified clear links between Active Transportation
and healthier lifestyles, with positive impacts documented in Figure 1 by Active Living Research, making
these desirable goals.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
4 | P a g e
FIGURE 1 - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION BENEFITS
In Riverside County, with a
strengthening partnership between the
Riverside County Department of Public
Health and the cities and transit
applicants, there has been success in
securing state and regional level
funding:
$21.9 million in state and federal
awarded funds and twelve (12)
successful projects in Caltrans
Cycle 1 Active Transportation
Program statewide competitive
offering; and
$9 million in SCAG’s
Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) Active
Transportation Program awards
for seven (7) projects.
Further success is anticipated with new Active Transportation projects submitted June 1st, 2015 across
the county to Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 2 offering. Future projects in Riverside
County are anticipated to be funded from this competitive $600 million statewide budget. As the statewide
ATP becomes more competitive, securing these funds will require both continued local investment and
effective coordination between local governments, public health officials, school administrators, and others
to demonstrate high-priority need for requested Active Transportation projects.
New County-Level Funding Decisions for FTA Section 5310 Specialized Transportation
New funding responsibilities came to RCTC in FY 2013/14 with RCTC now responsible for the selection
and programming of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Older
Adults and Individuals with Disabilities. Caltrans previously fully administered the Section 5310 program.
The Commission now acts as arbiter for these funds, responsible for the Call for Projects and award
decisions, but not involved in the distribution of funds. That responsibility still remains with Caltrans.
RCTC conducted a successful Section 5310 Call for Projects providing $2.6 million in grants to improve
mobility of older adults and persons with disabilities with capital and operating projects. Grantees were a
mix of human service transportation agencies as well as public transit providers receiving funding to
provide trips, purchase vehicles, and provide mobility management support for the transportation of
disadvantaged populations. These programs’ operations reports will be included in the next Countywide
Report.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
5 | P a g e
VetLink – New Multi-Modal Trip Planner for Inland Southern California
The VetLink-To-Go Trip Planner was initiated in early 2015 (www.211VetLink.org) to assist veterans,
active duty service members, and their families locate and plan needed transportation. This project is an
outgrowth of a federal grant secured by San Bernardino and Riverside Counties from the FTA’s highly
competitive Veterans Transportation and Community Living Initiative (VTCLI) to support one-call/one-click
projects that assist veterans in connecting with transit services.
Lead locally by the 2-1-1 organizations of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, the project has built
an effective partnership with the transit providers of both counties, with RCTC and the San Bernardino
Associated Governments, and the Loma Linda Veterans Administration Medical Center as well as other
community-based organizations. The VetLink Trip Planner differs from Google Transit and other such trip
planners in that it provides multi-modal origin-to-destination information. VetLink includes paratransit
program information and details of volunteer services of the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) and
Riverside’s Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project as well as each of the public transit
operators of both counties. VetLink currently maintains current service-level information on about three-
dozen providers, to provide detailed trip plans to veterans and others who inquire. The VTCLI grant of
$300,000 in Federal funds supported this initiative. Subsequent Measure A grants support the VetLink
mobility manager position at Riverside’s 2-1-1 Community Connect.
Care-A-Van and Youth Build Transportation Collaboration
With a $135,000 Job Access and Reverse Commute grant from RCTC, the Care-A-Van organization
provided regular transportation to Hemet area youth in 2014 and 2015, enabling them to participate in the
Riverside County Youth Build project. Youth Build is a collaboration between the Riverside County Office
of Education, Habitat for Humanity, the California Family Life Center, and Care-A-Van. Trips provided to
participating youth, all of whom were high school dropouts, were between the Hemet youth center at the
California Family Life Center and two sites where these youth were building homes under the supervision of
Habitat for Humanity. Youth were also transported to community college classes.
Presently, the program’s 50 youth have achieved a 70% success rate of either full-time enrollment in
post-secondary education or securing regular employment.
PERFORMANCE REPORTING PURPOSES
The Riverside County Annual Countywide Performance Report, FY 2013/14 presents the second year of
an updated performance reporting structure first approved by the Commission in July 2014. This describes
Riverside County’s transportation network in relation to five indicator categories.
Commission purposes of this Countywide Report include:
1. Presenting a countywide view of transit performance, establishing a neutral reporting program
of Riverside County’s public transportation services;
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
6 | P a g e
2. Providing a reporting resource to support Commission-level transportation planning and
programming decisions that can help identify transit issues related to land-use decisions on a
city and countywide level;
3. Providing a snapshot in time, a benchmark set of measures from which to view public
transportation and to assess countywide trends;
4. Using outcome-based performance reporting methodologies that meet Federal statute Moving
Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) and State of California Transportation
Development Act (TDA) statutory requirements; and
5. Using a framework that is expandable to other modes and to other measures, potentially
including vanpool, rideshare, 5-1-1, and bicycles, and may be adapted to aid in documenting
Riverside County’s SB 375 goals for reducing passenger vehicle emissions.
INTO THE MEASURES
Riverside County public transportation programs are funded by a mix of federal, state, and local
sources. While RCTC has programming responsibility for all public transit funding sources and directly
manages state (TDA) and local (Measure A) funds for Riverside County, the transit operators themselves are
responsible for management of the federal funds. The single exception to this is with regard to Metrolink
operations. RCTC is directly responsible for and administers the FTA Section 5307 and 5309 rail funding
allocated to Riverside County. With respect to this report, while federal funding for transit is referenced,
performance reporting for the federal funds is not covered. Performance reporting of the federal funds
occurs through the federal triennial audit process reviewed by the Commission’s Audit Ad Hoc Committee.
This report considers the state and local funds received by Riverside County, examining indicators in
five specific categories. These categories were selected in order to provide a comprehensive picture of
Riverside County public transportation services and programs. Some indicators are presented in relation to
individual transit providers. Others reflect the experience of three Riverside County geographic regions:
Western Riverside, the Coachella Valley, and the Palo Verde Valley.
1. POLICY AND COMPLIANCE
This first measure is based upon existing California law, farebox recovery ratio. All transit providers
must achieve established minimum contributions to operating costs from their riders’ fares, called farebox.
The State of California, Transportation Development Act (TDA) Section 6633.2 statutorily requires that in
order to protect continued funding, public transit programs receiving Local Transportation Funds (LTF) must
collect passenger fares to contribute to overall operating costs at minimum proportion of fares to total
expense. This is expressed as the farebox recovery ratio.
The farebox recovery ratio is the proportion that passenger fares, and other eligible revenues,
contribute to the transit program’s overall operating expense. Table 1 presents the farebox recovery ratios
for each of Riverside County’s TDA-funded public transit providers, showing that each of the county’s
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
7 | P a g e
operators are meeting and exceeding their respective minimum farebox requirement. The mandatory
farebox standards for these state-mandated minimums are:
20% for urban transit providers; and
10% for rural or demand-response-only providers.
In Riverside County, because each of the large transit providers operate in both urban and rural areas,
Caltrans allows a “blended” minimum fare revenue standard through a formula created by the Riverside
County Transportation Commission and approved by Caltrans. Blended ratios combine the modes of fixed
route and demand response fare recovery rates for both urban and non-urbanized areas, recognizing the
large expanses that Riverside County’s public transportation programs must serve.
Farebox recovery ratios reflect the interaction of several factors:
Farebox levels are influenced positively by ridership as more riders will generate increased fare
revenue and therefore achieve a higher fare contribution to operating costs;
Farebox recovery reflects critical agency policy in that transit fares are a key policy area and are
determined locally; and
Farebox recovery is influenced by attention to operating costs, as systems operating efficiently
will have lower expenses and fares will represent a comparatively higher proportion of total
costs—a higher farebox recovery ratio.
Table 1 presents the specific farebox recovery ratio of the individual transit providers that range from
11% to 26% fare recovery in relation to total operations expense. The overall countywide fare revenue to
operating expense is 23.3%.
TABLE 1 – COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT, AUDITED FAREBOX RECOVERY, FY 2013/14 – 23.3%
Farebox recovery ratios are a tool by which to assess a transit program’s strength. This ratio reflects the
interaction of operator fare policy and efficiency in handling expenses and riders’ utilization of the service.
A healthy transportation network – with higher farebox recovery ratios – is finding the right balance
between rider contribution to cost, public subsidy of operating expense, and optimal operating efficiency.
COUNTYWIDE
2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014
Total Operating Revenue
from Passenger Fares $163,258 $167,869 $409,812 $64,166 $382,963 $14,823,807 5,052,148 $21,064,023
Total Operating Expenses,
Net Farebox [1]$1,441,840 $1,474,989 $2,042,898 $469,112 $3,436,714 $55,837,080 $25,623,354 $90,325,987
Minimum Farebox Recovery
Requirement, Per TDA and
RCTC Adopted Policy
10%10%20%10%10%17.49%17.55%n/a
Actual Farebox Recovery
Ratio 11.3%11.4%20.1%13.7%11.1%26.5%19.7%23.3%
[1] Net fare box is based upon agency policy, in conformance with TDA rules and RCTC adopted policy.
Source: Annual Financial Statements with Independent Auditor's Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2014 - All Operators' Final Transit Services Fund
RTA SUNLINEAudit Results for All
Operators
BANNING BEAUMONT CORONA PVVTA RIVERSIDE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
8 | P a g e
How Are We Doing?
As noted above, each of the county’s transit providers exceeded their minimum state-mandated
farebox recovery ratios of 10% for Banning, Beaumont, Palo Verde Valley and the City of Riverside, of 17%
for RTA and SunLine, and of 20% for Corona. For Riverside County the FY 2013/14 overall county farebox
recovery ratio was at a very healthy 23.3%, although down 8.5% from the prior reporting period when the
farebox recovery ratio was 25.5.%.
Farebox reflects both revenue from riders and operating expense. The ratios of this reporting period
were influenced by a slightly lower level of fares received from riders, $21.1 million, down just 2% from last
year’s $21.6 million in fares received and coupled with increased operating expense. Total operating
expenses increased from the prior year’s $84.4 million to the current $90.3 million, a 6.9% increase that
reflected increased sales tax revenue generated from a strengthening local economy. Despite higher
expenditures and slightly lower fare revenues, each of Riverside County’s public operators exceeded its
minimum state-mandated farebox.
2. UTILIZATION
The second measure, trips per capita, points to the utilization of the public transportation network in
Riverside County. Trips per capita reflect total trips provided in relation to the overall county population.
This measure represents use of public transit by the total population to present an annual figure of trips
taken per county resident. Land use decisions made by the county and the cities can influence transit
availability, convenience, cost, and even reliability. These all combine to impact the public’s use of transit
routes and transportation programs.
Riverside County has continued to experience high levels of population growth. Its 41.7% increase from
years 2000 to 2010 was reported by the US Census as the highest county growth rate in the State of
California. Since last year, the county’s population grew by 2.3%. In an environment of continuing
population growth, public transportation must work steadily to increase ridership for its trips-per-capita
indicator to simply stay constant. Monitoring trips per capita over time suggests how well the network
connects people and available transit services, even as more people are traveling to more places.
Table 2 presents the trips-per-capita calculation that is inclusive of all public transportation programs
within Riverside County, providing more than 16.4 million trips to the county’s 2.25 million residents, as of
January 2014. Appendix B presents the system-level detail from which the modal trip counts that are
presented in Table 2 are compiled.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
9 | P a g e
TABLE 2 – PUBLIC TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA, FY 2013/14
Trips per capita is a standard industry measure for reporting the volumes of public transit trips taken in
relation to a region’s population. For Riverside County as a whole, and considering all public transit modes
of rail, fixed route, demand responsive, and specialized transportation, a trips-per-capita rate of 7.3 was
achieved during FY 2013/14. The 16.4 million public transit trips presented in Table 2 and detailed in
Appendix B, include Metrolink boardings of almost 898,216. This count reflects a change in how annual
boardings are calculated, beginning after 2010. This year’s annual Metrolink boardings are based upon pass
sales for trips boarding at Riverside County stations on the three Metrolink lines that originate in Riverside:
the Riverside Line, the 91 Line, and the Inland Empire-Orange County Line.
Of the trips reported in Table 2, 96.5% were provided by the public transit providers, including over 14
million (86%) fixed route trips and almost 824,000 (5%) demand responsive trips. RCTC’s specialized
transportation program provided almost 578,000 trips, 4% of total trips, supplementing public transit’s
demand responsive programs and providing more choices to Riverside County users.
How Are We Doing?
A measure of 7.3 transit trips per capita is calculated for this most recent 2013/14 reporting year,
relating the 16.4 million trips provided to the county’s population of 2.25 million persons in January 2013.
Service by Mode Trips % of Total
Trips
Rail [1]898,216 898,216 5%
Public Bus, Fixed Route [2]9,415,242 4,684,278 44,432 14,143,952 86%
Public Demand Responsive 684,607 139,042 823,649 5%
Specialized Transportation/Universal Call Program 462,216 115,520 577,736 4%
ALL TRIPS: Including Rail, Public Transit, Measure A , JARC and
New Freedom Programs [3]10,562,065 4,938,840 44,432 16,443,553 100%
TOTAL POPULATION [4]1,791,727 437,342 25,990 2,255,059
Trips per Capita for FY 2013/14 Total Population [4]
Notes:
[1] Annualized from average weekday daily boardings at Riverside County stations: Riverside, 91 and Inland Empire-Orange County Lines.
[2] Public Bus, Fixed Route trip counts do not include Specialized Transportation funded fixed route trips.
[3] Ridership and vehicle data for Public Transit Operators extracted from TransTrack Table 2 on 4/15/15.
[4] RCTC FY 2014/15 Mid-Year Revenue Projections Agenda - Department of Finance January 1, 2013, Demographic Research Unit
7.3
Western
Riverside
County
Coachella
Valley
Public Transportation Trips Provided
FY 2013/14 Countywide Palo Verde
Valley
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
10 | P a g e
As reported later in this document, this 7.3 trips-per-capita measure reflects an increasing transit ridership
base, in the face of a growing county population. Monitoring this important indicator over time provides
insight into how effectively the transit network keeps pace with a resident population that both grows in
number and spreads geographically. To provide a context for this indicator in Riverside County, Table 3
compares per capita transit use with several other regions.
TABLE 3 – TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA FOR OTHER AREAS, BUS BOARDINGS ONLY
Table 3 draws from the National Transit Database (NTD) annually reported ridership and reports only
bus boardings for fixed-schedule service and three Riverside County providers reporting into the NTD.
Table 3 does not include demand responsive, specialized transportation trips or rail passenger trips as these
are not consistently reported in the NTD. It also presents service area square mileage and population
density figures, both of which impact the transit operators’ ability to efficiently provide trips.
Although Table 3 shows other regions achieving higher trips per capita rates – such as Los Angeles,
North San Diego, Orange, and Sacramento Counties – none approach RTA’s service area of over 2,700
square miles that includes rural communities and extensive low-density suburban development as well as
urban Riverside. In the case of SunLine, its 10.8 trips-per-capita level in relation to service area size and
population density reflects the solid utilization of this system.
Again, it is reiterated that Table 3 presents only fixed route (the NTD category called motor bus) and
does not include demand responsive, specialized transit nor rail trips. These additional modes were
incorporated into the countywide trips-per-capita measure, previously presented in Table 2 and collectively
achieving the 7.3 trips per-capita-rate reported for FY 2013/14.
2013 National Transit Database Population
per Square
Mile
Motor Bus Statistics Only (In persons)
Riverside Countywide Annual Performance Report \*2,255,059 16,443,553 7.3
Sunline Transit Agency 423,644 4,571,588 10.8 1,120 378
Riverside Transit Agency 1,700,356 8,486,735 5.0 2,725 624
Corona Cruiser 160,000 163,054 1.0 41 3,902
LA Metro 8,626,817 350,385,593 40.6 1,513 5,702
San Diego MTS 2,218,791 51,587,559 23.3 716 3,099
Orange County Transit Authority 3,028,546 51,067,292 16.9 465 6,513
Sacramento Regional Transit 972,076 13,784,179 14.2 213 4,564
Omnitrans 1,484,000 15,655,099 10.5 463 3,205
North County Transit District (San Diego County)896,787 8,347,213 9.3 403 2,225
Victor Valley Transit Authority 334,988 1,765,073 5.3 424 790
Valley Metro (Phoenix, AZ.)3,629,114 9,619,743 2.7 732 4,958
Source: National Transit Database (http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/profiles.htm) NTD Transit Profiles/Transit Agency Search/2013
\* As documented in this report and inclusive of some NTD-reported data but including additonal data sources.
Service Area
Population
Unlinked
Passenger Trips
Trips per
Capita
Service Area
Square
Mileage
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
11 | P a g e
3. ACCESSIBILITY AND COVERAGE
This measure considers the array of low-density urban, suburban, and rural operating environments in
which Riverside County public transit services operate. The challenge of serving such dispersed population
centers — over large expanses of space — is reflected in the effort required to provide adequate levels of
coverage. The coverage metric presented here is percentage of residents within ¾ of a mile of public fixed
route transit. This assesses the proportion of the population who live within ¾ of a mile of transit fixed
route service, excluding dial-a-ride services.
This ¾ of a mile metric is greater than the typical ¼-mile walkable distance commonly used by transit
planners. It does however suggest transit’s sphere of influence as the ¾-mile envelope mirrors the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirement for the provision of complementary paratransit to
persons with disabilities. The indicator identifies total population living within ¾ of a mile of local fixed
route, or of a commuter service bus stop, as a percentage of total service area population. It should be
noted that additional transit service, specifically paratransit, may exist past this ¾-mile metric. While
continuing effort is being made to spatially quantify and measure paratransit services, costs and
performance, both modes are reflected in the farebox and trips-per-capita metrics.
For commuters living at significant distances from their jobs, the long trips between home and work can
be difficult. Transit can ameliorate challenges that a jobs-housing imbalance presents by providing an
alternative to driving alone. For local trips, with housing often at distances from city centers or shopping
and local jobs, public transit seeks the balance between coverage to serve sprawling, low-density
neighborhoods and operating efficiencies necessary to pick up sufficient riders, transport them quickly, and
generate adequate farebox revenues. This balancing act is reflected in decisions about where buses travel
and how frequently.
The accessibility measure reported here of residences within ¾ of a mile of transit routes presents a
“30,000 foot level” assessment of public transit’s fixed route coverage of its service area in relation to the
population residing there. Five maps follow depicting each transit provider’s service area and the
population within ¾ of a mile for that provider, presenting only services within Riverside County.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
12 | P a g e
FIGURE 2 – RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY – 74% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
13 | P a g e
FIGURE 3 – SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY - 81% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
14 | P a g e
FIGURE 4 – CORONA CRUISER - 73% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
15 | P a g e
FIGURE 5 – PASS TRANSIT - 84% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MILE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
16 | P a g e
FIGURE 6 – PALO VERDE VALLEY - 72% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN ¾ OF A MIL
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
17 | P a g e
4. CONNECTIVITY
A measure of connectivity was identified for this Countywide Report as transfers between transit
routes, modes, systems, and corridors. These all contribute to the robustness of a transit network.
Connections help riders make regional trips and travel beyond their immediate neighborhood. Improved
connections also speed the trip, whether by physical transfer or common fare media or coordinated
schedules.
The particular connectivity indicator reported here counts the existing physical connections between
transit routes and transportation systems in Riverside County. These may be transfers between routes
within a transit property, within the county as a whole or between transit systems operating in different
counties. The count alone does not reflect the quality of the individual connection, in terms of how well or
how poorly services are connected, but it does indicate that a connection exists. Frequency, span, and time
between connections can all have an effect on connectivity. Working to improve connectivity by
considering these factors in both transit planning and performance reporting between Riverside and its
neighboring counties will contribute to improved mobility for Riverside County residents.
TABLE 4 – BUS AND RAIL TRANSFER LOCATION COUNTS FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY
How Are We Doing?
There has been fairly nominal change in the overall network, looked at from a countywide perspective,
with a 5% reduction in the total number of transfer locations reported. This is generally positive where re-
routing and service enhancements lead to inter-lining of routes and more “one-seat” trips for transit users.
Changes have been at the margins, with just a few segments adding additional connections or resulting in
some loss of other transfer points as service levels to new, different areas are improved.
Supporting regional connectivity points to continued attention to the transfers within the county and
between systems (5% of transfer opportunities), between counties (6% of all transfer opportunities), and to
Public Transportation
Transfer Locations
Fixed-Route and Rail #%
Intra-System Bus 949 101 20 1,070 85.3%
Inter-County Bus, Within County 61 5 0 66 5.3%
Regional Bus Transit Between Counties 77 0 0 77 6.1%
Regional Rail and National Inter-City Bus 31 10 1 42 3.3%
TOTAL 1,118 116 21 1,255 100%
[1] Reflects RTA and Corona's May 2015 service changes.
[2] Reflects SunLine's January 2015 service change.
Source: See Appendix C for detail by operator.
Western
Riverside
County
FY 13/14 [1]
Coachella
Valley
FY 13/14 [2]
Palo Verde
Valley
Countywide Totals
FY 13/14
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
18 | P a g e
the regional rail and inter-city bus service (3% of all transfer opportunities). These aid in the mobility of
Riverside County residents who wish to use the larger regional network. The good news here is that there
are twice as many of these inter-county transfer opportunities and a 33% increase in connections to
regional rail and inter-city bus reported this year versus in the previous reporting period.
In the next reporting periods, greater change in these transfer connection counts are likely as the Perris
Valley Line begins operation, as RTA realizes the near-term recommendations from its Comprehensive
Operational Analysis, and as other operators institute additional system changes.
5. RESOURCES
The final measure is that of combined resources that together establish the composite picture of
Riverside County’s public transportation network. The resources presented in Table 5 detail the county’s
combined transit-related resources within the county’s three geographic regions, including:
1. State and local funding that support service and can match available federal funding;
2. Public transit vehicles by which these programs provide trips; and
3. Revenue vehicle miles driven that reflect the quantities of public transit’s fixed route and
paratransit service provided across these large service areas.
Table 5 reports available transit resources and also includes two measures that reflect the service area
sizes and quantities of revenue service miles provided. The measures presented in Table 5 include first,
transit vehicle per square mile and secondly, vehicle revenue miles per square mile. These indicators give a
sense of the physical space that Riverside County transit operators must cover. They provide some
indication of how much transit service is provided in relation to the size of the service area, over the course
of the year, and within these three regions.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
19 | P a g e
TABLE 5 – PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION RESOURCES IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY: COMMISSION ALLOCATED STATE AND LOCAL
TRANSIT FUNDING, VEHICLES AND VEHICLE REVENUE MILES
How Are We Doing?
As noted earlier, transit funding from state and local resources increased from the prior period’s $54
million to this reporting year’s almost $62 million, a healthy 15% increase. This provides somewhat greater
flexibility to the transit providers and enables them to begin to consider judicious increases to service
levels, guided by their short range transit plans and comprehensive operational plan recommendations.
Notably, this increase in funding has enabled some transit providers to expand and replace vehicle
fleets. Total public transit vehicles reported have gone from 445 reported in the prior period to the current
608, a 37% increase. For RTA, its capital funding resources allowed for expansion of 27 vehicles, spread
across fixed route and demand responsive operations. But equally importantly, capital funds supported the
replacement of the entire fleet to ensure fuel-efficient, safe, and attractive new vehicles operating
throughout its service.
SunLine increased its fleet size by 14%, adding 14 new vehicles to its Americans with Disabilities Act
complementary paratransit. The City of Riverside Special Transit Services increased its fleet from 30 to 47
vehicles, a 57% increases. Both services are addressing the increasing demand of an aging population, with
more older adults considering public dial-a-ride services as an alternative to driving themselves. The PASS
Transit program of Banning and Beaumont increased its fleet by 2 vehicles, now a combined fleet of 32
vehicles. The addition of one new vehicle in Palo Verde Valley enabled increased service by this now 12-
vehicle fleet and greater assurance about back-up capacity.
44,059,664$ 16,985,614$ 790,596$ $ 61,835,874
Programmed LTF and Measure A Transit, FY 2013/14, exclusive
of state and local rail funding
482 114 12 608
RTA, City of Riverside, Corona, Banning, Beaumont, SunLine, Palo
Verde Valley
12,777,587 3,902,105 176,421 16,856,113
RTA, City of Riverside, Corona, Banning, Beaumont, SunLine, Palo
Verde Valley
2,337 1,120 1,042 4,499
0.21 0.10 0.01 0.14
5,468 3,484 169 3,747
Square mileage for total county - US Census Quick Facts;
Square mileage for operators' service areas: SRTP for SunLine; GIS analysis for RTA as presented in Figure 1 and for PPVTA as presented in Figure 3.
Transit Vehicles (fixed route & paratransit, excluding taxis)
Vehicle Revenue Miles (fixed route & paratransit)
Transit Service Area Square Mileage (Total County=7,206 sq. mi. \1)
Measure - Vehicles per Square Mile
Measure - Vehicle Revenue Miles Per Square Mile
Sources: Vehicle and mileage information from FY 2013/14 TransTrack Reports - Table 1 Fleet Inventory and Quarterly Performance Scorecard. Extracted from TransTrack
on April 15, 2015.
Public Transportation Resources FY 2013/14 Western
Riverside
County
Coachella Valley Palo Verde
Valley Countywide Totals
State and Local Transit Funding,
Excluding all Federal $s
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
20 | P a g e
For the spatial measure of vehicles per square mile, the increase in fleet size for most operators had a
positive impact upon the vehicles per square mile. It grew from last year’s 0.09 to this reporting period’s
0.14 measure, an impressive 50% increase in the ratio between vehicles and the transit service area square
mileage of this large county.
Similarly for the service level measure of vehicle revenue miles per square mile, the same good news is
reflected with a 14% increase to 3,747 vehicle revenue miles per square mile from the prior reporting
period value of 3,301.
CONCLUSION
Generally, the public transit measures reported in this Countywide Report have been positive and
represent good news for the mobility of Riverside County residents as summarized in Table 6. The single
exception is that the countywide farebox recovery ratio did decline by 8.5% from 25.5% to 23.3%.
However, this remains above a statewide minimum of 20% for most fixed route operations, while still
including all of the county’s public paratransit programs. The decline in farebox partly reflects increased
spending power that is the result of increasing sales tax revenue from a recovering economy without yet
commensurate increases in ridership. Of critical importance, despite this modest decline in the overall
ratio, every Riverside County public transit program exceeded their individual, mandated farebox recovery
minimum.
Further good news is that transit ridership increased by 3%. This sits against a backdrop of declining
ridership levels in adjacent Orange, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino Counties, and many of the public
transit programs operating in Los Angeles basin cities. Both Los Angeles Metro and OCTA instituted
significant fare hikes that typically suppress ridership. Further, a recovering economy coupled with stable
gas prices enabled some previously transit dependent riders to purchase cars. In the face of these factors
that contribute to decline in ridership in neighboring counties, Riverside County’s overall 3% increase in
ridership suggests that some new riders are using public transit, while some riders are taking more transit
trips.
Ridership increases are also reflected in an increasing trip-per-capita measure of 7.3, steadily, although
slowly, increasing over the past three reporting periods, detailed in Appendix B. Contrasted with annual
population increases of 2% to 3%, this means that Riverside County transit programs are not only holding
their own in the face of a continuously increasing county population, but are growing transit ridership use.
Within these transit ridership increases, every mode showed increased utilization. Fixed route and
demand response services both increased ridership 3.5% and specialized transportation increased ridership
3.3% over the prior reporting period. Metrolink saw the smallest proportionate increase, just 1.1%,
although other parts of the Metrolink system, outside of Riverside County, saw ridership declines.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
21 | P a g e
FY 2012/13 FY 2013/14 % Chng
Farebox Recovery Ratio 25.5%23.3%-8.5%
Total Transit Trips 15,911,447 16,443,553 3%
Excluding Metrolink 15,022,603 15,545,337 3%
Transit Trips Per Capita 7.1 7.3 3%
Transit Accessibility & Coverage 77%77%no change
Countywide Average 3/4 Mile Accessibility to Fixed Route
Bus Stop Transfer Connections 1315 1,255 -5%
In tra-System 88.3%85.3%-3%
Inter-County Bus, Within County 3.4%5.3%54%
Regional Bus Transit Between Counties 5.8%6.1%6%
Regional Rail and National Inter-City Bus 2.5%3.3%33%
FY 13/14 Transportation Resources
State and Local Operating Funds $53.9 million $61.8 million 15%
Public Transit Vehicles (Fixed Route & Paratransit)445 608 37%
Vehicle Revenue Miles (Fixed Route & Paratransit)16.1 million 16.9 million 5%
Square Miles of Transit Service Area 4,499 4,499 no change
Vehicles Per Square Mile 0.09 0.14 50%
Vehicle Revenue Miles Per Square Mile 3,301 3,747 14%
Riverside County Public Transportation
Summary of Countywide Performance
TABLE 6 – SUMMARY OF COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE
Measures of accessibility and coverage show no change. Changes in the bus stop and transfer
connections within and between transit programs were limited. There was some increase in the number of
inter-system, regional rail, and inter-city bus service connections. There will likely be greater change
among these measures during the next reporting period when the new Perris Valley Line, and routing
changes for RTA and SunLine, are instituted.
Underlying transit operations change lies in the 15% increase in operating revenue received from state
and local funds. Growing from $53.9 million to this reporting period’s $61.8 million, this 15% increase has
translated into increased fleet sizes and more vehicle revenue miles on the road. Much of this was put into
the 37% increase in the number of transit vehicles in peak service. There was a 5% increase in the number
of revenue vehicle miles countywide, a modest increase to the volume of transit services available.
This is all good news as Riverside County, and its various public transportation programs, continue to
improve mobility for residents, commuters, and visitors. They are all using public transit services that
include regional rail, regional and community-level fixed-route buses, demand responsive services to riders
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
22 | P a g e
who are ADA certified, and to other riders who are elderly and disabled as well as RCTC’s specialized
transportation programs that include mileage reimbursement and other special purpose shuttles.
Initiatives during this recent fiscal year of 2014/15 will help to further these gains. The new Perris Valley
Line and exploration of rail service from the Coachella Valley, expands rail options. The system-wide, long-
range planning of the two largest transit operators in the county sets these organizations on solid footing
for planned growth, within their respective revenue bases. Active Transportation improvements to the
infrastructure for pedestrians and bicyclists will help transit users. Information tools continue to grow,
helping to connect riders with available transit. In this past year, for veterans, active military duty
personnel, and their family members, the VetLink To-Go Trip Planner builds upon RCTC’s effective
implementation of the IE 511 traveler information program. And specialized transportation services, such
as Care-A-Van’s support to Youth Build and through RCTC’s new administrative responsibility for the
Section 5310 capital and operating funds, ensures that highly specialized transportation needs are
addressed.
In conclusion, Figure 7 depicts the experience of all Riverside County transit ridership by mode, showing
the steady increases across each mode over these four reporting years. This solid growth bodes well for
the continued expansion and development of Riverside County’s public transportation network across this
large and diverse county and its growing number of residents.
FIGURE 7 – HISTORY OF ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS BY MODE
10,575
13,115 13,668 14,144
549
768
796 824
62
495
559 578
2,700
878
889 898
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
FY 05/06 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 FY 13/14
An
n
u
a
l
O
n
e
-Wa
y
P
a
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
T
r
i
p
s
Tho
u
s
a
n
d
s
Riverside County Annual Passenger Trips by Mode,
Four Reporting Periods
Regional Rail
Specialized
Transportation
Public Demand
Response
Public Bus,
Fixed Route
Note: Change in how Metrolink
reported trips for Riverside County
were made between FY 05/06 and
FY 11/12.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
23 | P a g e
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Definitions, Data Sets and References
Appendix B – Public Transportation Trips Provided, All Modes, Four Fiscal Years
Appendix C – Bus Stop Location Counts by Operator and Revised Table 7 - FY 12/13 Transfer Locations
Appendix D – Public Transit Fleet Size Over Three Years
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
24 | P a g e
APPENDIX A – DEFINITIONS, DATA SETS, AND REFERENCES
Data Element Anticipated Data Sources Definition
Passenger trips TransTrack data – extracted from
Table 2 – SRTP Service Summary on
April 15, 2015.
No Metrolink at present in Transit
Reporting
- One-way passenger boardings of fixed-route,
paratransit, deviated fixed-route;
- Metrolink boardings at Riverside County
stations.
Operating expense FY 2013/14 Annual Financial
Statements with Independent
Auditor’s Report
Definition from March 2008 adopted
Commission policy, all operating expense object
classes exclusive of depreciation and
amortization, vehicle lease expense. PUC
99247(a)
Fare revenue FY 2013/14 Annual Financial
Statements with Independent
Auditor’s Report
Definition from March 2008 adopted
Commission policy:
Fare revenue plus supplemental fare revenues
from local support, which may include interest,
advertising, etc. as provided for in PUC 6611.3
Transit route structure Active service operating along a
fixed-route or deviated fixed-route
as of June 30th.
GIS shape files for active routes
County population data at
the block level
US Census, American Community
Survey: 1 Yr. - 2011 Estimates
- Total county population
- Block level data for most current one year
ACS estimate
Transit transfer data: Intra-
system
Inter-system
Inter-county
Transfer locations at which routes
connect; each location counted only
once; counts validated by operator
Count each stop-level transfer location one
time for each operator, as of June 30, 2014.
Vehicle revenue miles TransTrack data – extracted from
Table 2 – SRTP Service Summary on
April 15, 2015
Annual revenue service miles as of June 30,
2014
Or total vehicle service miles, inclusive of
deadhead.
Square mileage US Census County square mileage
Operator service area square
mileage reported in NTD
Whatever is reported to NTD, by operator.
Vehicle revenue hours TransTrack data – extracted from
Table 2 – SRTP Service Summary on
April 15, 2015
Annual revenue service hours as of June 30,
2014
Accessibility and coverage
GIS calculation for Figures 2
thru 6.
The methodology used to calculate population within the ¾ mile buffers and service
areas is included on each map. Using the local California State Plane Coordinate system
with distance units measured in feet, buffer and service area polygons for each set of
transit routes were first overlaid on top of the area’s 2010 US census blocks. Then, 2010
census population counts for each block intersecting these polygons were applied to
the corresponding buffer or service area using an area-ratio calculation. If, for example,
only ¼ of the area of a census block fell within the buffer or service area then only ¼ of
the population of that census block was applied to it. The sum of all these census block
calculations, in turn, comprised the population estimate for the corresponding buffer or
service area.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
25 | P a g e
APPENDIX B – PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TRIPS PROVIDED, ALL MODES
Public Transportation Trips
Provided
Service by Mode [1]Trips %of Total
Trips Trips
% of
Total
Trips
%
Chng
from
FY
05/06
# of
Vehicles in
Active
Service
Trips
% of
Total
Trips
%
Chng
from
Prior
Year
# of
Vehicles in
Active
Service
Trips
% of
Total
Trips
%
Chng
From
Prior
Year
Rail [2]2,700,117 19%878,438 6%N/A 888,844 6%1.2%898,216 5%1.1%
RCTC Commuter Rail - Riverside Line 1,101,646 215,864 208,230 175,032
RCTC Commuter Rail - Inland Empire Orange County Line 1,066,541 455,510 500,786 553,520
RCTC Commuter Rail - 91 Line 531,930 207,064 179,828 169,664
Public Bus, Fixed Route [3] 10,575,445 76%13,115,046 86%24.0%275 13,667,996 86%4.2%389 14,143,952 86%3.5%
RTA FR 5,718,234 6,555,135 94 6,861,830 191 7,155,365
SunLine FR 3,474,361 4,436,917 69 4,558,720 69 4,684,278
RTA Contract FR 916,366 1,635,377 80 1,713,555 90 1,744,652
Banning FR 183,265 127,499 9 138,503 10 146,981
Corona FR 146,983 153,783 4 163,054 4 169,745
Beaumont FR 89,962 164,390 8 190,589 13 198,499
Palo Verde Valley FR 46,274 41,945 11 41,745 12 44,432
Public Demand Responsive 548,845 4%767,883 5%170 795,503 5%3.6%219 823,649 5%3.5%
RTA DAR 199,322 372,322 88 384,442 106 398,636
Riverside Special Transportation Services DAR 145,223 174,058 30 172,725 47 182,878
SunLine DAR 83,956 124,720 31 136,208 45 139,042
Corona DAR 58,892 61,285 12 65,635 12 68,852
Beaumont DAR 28,656 18,786 4 18,710 3 16,899
RTA Taxi 18,536 7,648 -8,539 -8,271
Banning DAR 9,463 9,064 5 9,244 6 9,071
Palo Verde Valley DAR 4,797 -----
Specialized Transportation/ Universal Call Program 61,859 0.4%494,516 3%699%45 559,104 4%13.1%54 577,736 4%3.3%
Fixed Route:
RTA Extended Services -101,038 108,180 68,726
RTA Commuter Link -58,466 64,171 62,542
SunLine Commuter Link 220 --12,868 14,528
SunLine Line 95 North Shore ---26,603
Paratransit/ Community Shuttle Services:
Boys & Girls Club of Southwest County -57,044 13 49,135 16 41,676
Care-A-Van/ HOPE Bus 9,295 20,115 10 25,060 12 29,845
Care Connexxus 13,755 15,829 4 17,597 5 16,333
City of Norco - Senior Shuttle 2,606 1,130 1 2,066 1 1,956
CVAG Roy's Desert Resource Center -38,945 2 46,561 2 45,272
Friends of Moreno Valley MoVan 4,842 5,364 1 4,941 1 3,002
Inland AIDS Project 1,974 2,377 2 2,354 2 2,342
Operation Safehouse -524 1 309 1 624
Riverside County Regional Medical Center -10,071 10 9,208 10 5,835
United States Veterans Initiative ----4 5,217
Wildomar Senior Community -440 1 446 --
Mileage Reimbursement (one-way trips supported):
Court Appointed Special Advocates- CASA -9,380 6,696 5,702
TRIP - Partnership to Preserve Independent Living 24,393 82,383 83,831 87,850
Bus Passes/ Taxi Vouchers/ Van Pool Trips
Community Connect/ TAP Bus Pass Trips -65,263 62,742 65,212
RCTC Commuter benefits/ Coachella Van Pool Trips -19,037 17,700 18,740
RTA - Travel Training -5,026 39,334 65,354
SunLine Taxi Voucher Program -2,084 5,905 10,377
Mobility Management and Travel Training Projects
Care Connexxus - Driver Sensitivity Training -n/a n/a n/a
Community Connect/ 211 -n/a n/a n/a
Blindness Support - Travel Training -n/a n/a n/a
RTA Travel Training -n/a n/a n/a
ALL TRIPS: Including Rail, Public Transit, Measure A , JARC
and New Freedom 13,886,266 100%15,255,883 100%10%490 15,911,447 100%4%662 16,443,553 100%3%
TOTAL POPULATION 2,005,477 2,217,778 2,227,577 2,255,059
Trips per Capita for 2006 Total Population (2,005,477) [4]6.9
Trips per Capita for 2012 Total Population [5]6.9
Trips per Capita for 2013 Total Population [6]
Trips per Capita for 2014 Total Population [7]7.3
Notes:
[1] Ridership and vehicle data for Public Transit Operators populated from TransTrack Tables 1&2 - SRTP Service Summary on 4/15/15.
[2] FY 11-12 through FY 13-14 Annualized from average weekday daily boardings at Riverside County stations: Riverside, 91 and Inland Empire-Orange County Lines.
[4] State of California, Department of Finance, July 2007, and July 2011
FY 11/12
RCTC's Annual ReportRCTC's Annual Report
FY 12/13
RCTC's Annual Report
FY 13/14
2007 Coordinated Plan
FY 05/06
7.1
[3] Public bus, Fixed Route trip counts for RTA and SunLine do not include Specialized Transportation funded fixed route trips (RTA Extended,
Commuterlink and Travel Training, SunLine Commuter, and Community Connect TAP)
[5] RCTC FY 2012/13 Mid-Year Revenue Projects - Department of Finance January 1, 2011, Demographic Research Unit
[6] RCTC FY 2013/14 Mid-Year Revenue Projects - Department of Finance January 1, 2012, Demographic Research Unit[7] RCTC FY 2014/15 Mid-Year Revenue Projects - Department of Finance January 1, 2013, Demographic Research Unit
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
26 | P a g e
APPENDIX C – BUS STOP LOCATION COUNTS BY OPERATOR AND REVISED FY 2012/13 TABLE 7
RTA Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations
INTRA SYSTEM INTER COUNTY REGIONAL
ROUTES/ S 1 2 3 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 27 29 30 31 32 33 35 40 41 42 49 50 51 55 61 74 79 202 204 206 208 210 212 216 217 High
l
a
n
d
e
r
S
h
u
t
t
l
e
Coro
n
a
C
r
u
i
s
e
r
Coro
n
a
C
r
u
i
s
e
r
R
e
d
Coro
n
a
C
r
u
i
s
e
r
B
l
u
e
Pass
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
Tem
e
c
u
l
a
T
r
o
l
l
e
y
Met
r
o
l
i
n
k
AMT
R
A
K
Omn
i
2
Grey
h
o
u
n
d
Omn
i
t
r
a
n
s
8
2
Omn
i
t
r
a
n
s
2
1
5
Omn
i
t
r
a
n
s
3
2
5
Omn
i
T
r
a
n
s
6
1
,
6
5
,
6
6
,
6
7
,
6
8
,
8
0
NCT
D
C
o
a
s
t
e
r
Sun
L
i
n
e
2
2
0
NCT
D
NCT
D
S
p
r
i
n
t
e
r
MTS OCT
A
7
9
4
OCT
A
2
4
,
4
2
,
4
6
,
5
0
,
5
1
,
5
5
Foo
t
h
i
l
l
T
r
a
s
i
t
1 1 3 3 3 3 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 49
3 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 11
7 1 3 1 1 1 7
8 4 1 1 1 7
10 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 34
11 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 11
12 4 3 4 3 6 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 40
13 4 3 3 3 5 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 41
14 4 5 2 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 37
15 5 3 5 4 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 38
16 4 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 4 5 3 1 1 1 1 5 44
18 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 11
19 2 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 22
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 15
21 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 14
22 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 28
23 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 14
24 2 2 2 3 1 10
27 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 1 27
29 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 22
30 2 1 1 2 1 1 8
31 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 16
32 1 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 15
33 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 1 15
35 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 13
40 1 1 1 1 1 1 6
41 1 3 2 1 1 8
42 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 10
49 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18
50 3 3 3 9
51 3 1 1 5 2 1 1 2 1 1 18
55 2 2 2 3 1 1 1 2 14 .
61 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 15
74 1 1 3 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 3 2 3 2 29
79 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 1 3 27
202 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 14
204 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 25
206 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 15
208 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 46
210 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 4 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 5 4 1 1 1 6 1 47
212 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 41
216 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 30
217 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 26
OCTA 794 1 1 1 3
48 1 5 8 6 34 10 31 34 30 39 34 12 21 10 14 31 15 10 29 18 8 13 16 12 10 6 7 10 16 3 6 14 15 30 26 7 19 12 47 33 43 24 22 0 1 6 6 4 0 15 6 1 2 8 15 2 2 1 32 3 2 1 1 2 1 950
TOTALS BY TYPE OF CONNECTION Intra System 839 Intra-County 17 Regional Rail 24 Regional Bus 70
NOTE: Some routes connect only in one direction, do not necessarily make a meaningful connection on the route's reverse dirction.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
27 | P a g e
SunLine Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations as of January 2015
REGIONAL RAIL/INTER-CITYINTRA-SYSTEM INTER-COUNTY
Routes 14 15 24 30 32 53 54 70 80 81 90 91 95 111 220 Pass
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
Met
r
o
l
i
n
k
AM
T
R
A
K
Gre
y
h
o
u
n
d
14 1 1 2 1 1 6
15 1 1
24 1 1 1 3
30 2 1 2 2 7
32 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 8
53 1 1 2 1 1 6
*** 54 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 14
70 1 1 1 3
80 2 3 1 1 1 1 9
81 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 10
90 1 1 1 2 2 1 8
91 1 1 1 2 2 1 8
** 95 1 1 1 2 2 1 8
111 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 18
* 220 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
6 1 3 7 7 4 13 2 9 9 8 8 8 16 4 1 1 8 1 116
TOTALS BY TYPE OF CONNECTION Intra-System 101 Inter-Co.5 Regional 10 116
*Effective date: September 10, 2012
**Effective date: September 2, 2013
***Effective date: January 6, 2014
SunLine's Route #220 to the Metrolink station and downtown Riverside supports out-of-county connections to San Bernardino, Los Angeles and San Diego Counties through the host of transfer options afforded at each of
these stops.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
28 | P a g e
Pass Transit Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations
INTRA-SYSTEM INTER-COUNTY REGIONAL
Route #s 1 3 4 5 7 9 11 17 40 120 Ca
b
a
z
o
n
C
i
r
c
l
e
Tota
l
I
n
t
r
a
-
S
y
s
t
e
m
RTA
1
4
RTA
3
1
RTA
3
5
RTA
2
1
0
Sun
L
i
n
e
2
2
0
Tota
l
I
n
t
e
r
-
C
o
u
n
t
y
Om
n
i
1
Om
n
i
2
Om
n
i
9
Om
n
i
2
0
2
Om
n
i
3
2
5
MA
R
T
A
B
i
g
B
e
a
r
MA
R
T
A
R
I
M
VVT
A
1
5
Tota
l
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
B
u
s
Met
r
o
l
i
n
k
-
S
a
n
B
e
r
n
a
r
d
i
n
o
AM
T
R
A
K
Gre
y
h
o
u
n
d
Tota
l
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
B
u
s
/
R
a
i
l
1 3 3 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 23
3 5 3 4 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1
4 3 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 15
5 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 9
7 1 2 2 2 7
9 2 2 2 2 2 2 12
11 3 2 1 1 1 8
17 1 2 1 1 5
40 0
120 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20
Cab Circ 1 1 1
19 16 11 11 8 10 10 3 0 3 1 1 6 6 5 5 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 126
TOTALS BY TYPE OF CONNECTION Intra-System Bus 92 Inter-County Bus 23 Regional Bus 7 Regional Rail/ Intercity Bus 4 126
Routes #1, 5, and 6 interact with other routes but have street stops and no number stops of their own.
Route #40 - Free Shuttle service to annual Music Concert at Stewart Park. Pick up and drop offs at various locations in Beaumont.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
29 | P a g e
INTRA-SYSTEM INTER-COUNTY REGIONAL RAIL/ INTERCITY BUS
Corona Cruiser Routes and
Connections/ Transfer Locations
Routes Red Blue RTA Sun
L
i
n
e
Met
r
o
l
i
n
k
AM
T
R
A
K
Gre
y
h
o
u
n
d
Red 9 10 1 20
Blue 9 11 2 22
9 9 21 0 3 0 0 42
Intra-System Inter-County Regional
18 21 3 42
TOTALS BY
TYPE OF
CONNECTION
PVVTA Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations
INTER-COUNTY REGIONALINTRA-SYSTEM
Routes 1 2 3 4 5 RTA Sun
L
i
n
e
Met
r
o
l
i
n
k
AM
T
R
A
K
Gre
y
h
o
u
n
d
1 3 1 2 1 7
2 3 1 2 6
3 1 1 1 3
4 2 2 1 5
5 0
TOTALS 6 6 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 21
Note: Route 5 is a weekend route and is the only route in operation. No other routes are available to transfer to.
Quartzsite Transit Services in Arizona connects paratransit services into Blythe/PVVTA Monday-Friday.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
30 | P a g e
REVISED TABLE 7 – FY 2012/13 TRANSFER LOCATIONS
Public Transportation
Transfer Locations
Fixed-Route and Rail #%
Intra-System 1,051 92 18 1,161 88%
Inter-System Within County 42 3 0 45 3%
Regional, Transit Between Counties 76 0 0 76 6%
Regional, Rail and National Inter-City Bus 29 3 1 33 3%
TOTAL 1,198 98 19 1,315 100%
[1] Through SunLine's January 2014 service change.
Source: See Appendix C for detail by operator.
Western
Riverside
County
FY 12/13
Coachella
Valley
FY 12/13 [1]
Palo Verde
Valley
FY 12/13
Countywide Totals
FY 12/13
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION:
ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014
31 | P a g e
APPENDIX D – PUBLIC TRANSIT FLEET SIZE OVER THREE YEARS
Public Transit
Vehicles
3-Year History
Western Riverside County 333 334 0%482 31%
Fixed Route 202 195 308
Demand Response 131 139 174
Coachella Valley 100 100 0%114 14%
Fixed Route 69 69 69
Demand Response 31 31 45
Palo Verde Valley 9 11 22%12 9%
Fixed Route 9 11 12
Demand Response
Source: Vehicle information from FY 2013/14 TransTrack Reports -- Table 1 Fleet Inventory.
TransTrack Report extracted on April 15, 2015
Countywide Totals 442 445 608
FY
2011/2012
FY
2012/2013
% Change
from Prior
Year
FY
2013/2014
% Change
from Prior
Year
Transit Vehicles only (fixed-route and demand response, excluding taxis)
RTA, City of Riverside, Corona, Banning, Beaumont, SunLine, Palo Verde Valley
1%37%