HomeMy Public PortalAbout20 10.A. Conceptual Approval of the Fixed-Route Transit StudyAGENDA
ITEM 10.A.
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
MEMORANDUM
December 3, 2013
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Jose E. Pulido , City Manager td
Via: Cathy Burroughs, Parks ~d Recreation Director
By: Wendy Chung, Management Ana lyst
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF THE FIXED-ROUTE TRANSIT STUDY
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Counci l is requested to:
a) Receive a presentation by Divers ified Transportation Solutions (DTS) on f indings
and recommendations from the recently completed Fixed -Route Trans it System
Needs Assessment Study (Study);
b) Approve the Fixed-Route Transit Study Alternatives Ana lysis Report (Attachment
"A") and DTS's Recommended Service Plan in concept; and
c) Direct staff to exp lore . opportunities for transit implementation by soliciti ng
proposals during the Dial -A-Ride (DAR) service operations Request for Proposa ls
(RFP) process in Spring 2014.
BACKGROUND:
1. Since 1993, the Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the
transportation services available to Temple City residents, with the purposes of
informing the public and Commissioners of ava i lable public transportation services;
reviewing and evaluating DAR pol icies and operations for any enhancements; and
allowing the public an opportunity to comment on public transportation offerings.
2. On March 21, 2012, the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that the
City Council include funds for a fixed-route transit program in the Fiscal Year (FY)
2012-13 City Budget.
City Council
December 3, 2013
Page 2 of 5
3. On November 1, 2012, the City issued a RFP for a Fixed-Route Transit System
Needs Assessment Study with the purposes of assessing community demand for a
local transit service; and developing a conceptual-level operating plan for an
efficient, cost-effective fixed-route transit program.
4. On November 30, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 12-4872
approving the Citywide Traffic Calming Master Plan and Resolution No. 12-4873
approving the Comprehensive Downtown Parking Strategic Plan-both of which
highlighted the potential benefits of a local transit program in addressing traffic
congestion and enhancing overall transportation safety.
5. On January 15, 2013, the City Council approved a Consultant Services Agreement
with Diversified Transportation Solutions to conduct the Study.
6. Between March 23 and April 24, 2013, a survey to gather public input regarding
community travel behaviors, desired travel destinations, fares, etc., was distributed
and completed through the City's website and social media, at various City events,
and a mailing to registered DAR members.
7. On April 24, 2013, DTS conducted a community workshop at the Temple City
Historical Society Hall to engage the public in a route-planning exercise.
8. On July 24, 2013, at a joint meeting of the Parks and Recreation and Public Safety
Commissions, DTS presented its Draft Fixed-Route Transit Study Alternatives
Analysis Report-which included study findings, and two service plan options
based on available funding levels. Among commissioner comments was a primary
concern with the cost of proposed operating plans. DTS was directed to provide a
phased implementation plan, and report back with requested modifications at a
second joint meeting (see Attachment "B" for meeting minutes).
9. On September 18, 2013, at the second joint meeting of the Parks and Recreation
and Public Safety Commissions, DTS returned with a final plan that incorporated a
new Multi-Phased Service Plan, which addressed cost concerns and provided the
City the flexibility of a pilot period to test public reception. The two commissions
conditionally approved the Recommended Service Plan, advising the City Council
direct staff to explore opportunities for operation by soliciting proposals during the
DAR RFP bid process in Spring 2014 (see Attachment "C" for meeting minutes).
ANAlYSIS:
Currently, the City's public transportation service is limited to membership DAR for local
senior and mobility-impaired community members. Over the years, residents have
expressed desire for a general population shuttle system-a sentiment supported in the
City Council
December 3, 2013
Page 3 of 5
study's survey results which found approximately 92% of 438 respondents indicating
support for local transit, and 85% indicating likelihood of using an available service for
local travel.
With a clear desire for local transit in Temple City, the Council set aside funds the last
two fiscal years for the completion of a needs assessment study, as well as possible
implementation of a system. Over the past year, staff has worked with DTS on the
Study-including survey of community demand, review of existing conditions (e.g., the
current transportation network, recommendations from existing studies, available
program resources, etc.), and identification of potential routes.
Following is a brief overview of DTS's four proposed service plan alternatives, including
one recommended. Each identifies different routes that link expressed destinations of
interest and existing transit connections, as well as associated operating costs:
• Strategic Service Plan
The Strategic Service Plan recommends three routes, each centered in
Downtown Temple City to allow transfers between routes and facilitate access to
the downtown district, then branching out to serve different areas of the city.
Service frequency is 40 minutes. Estimated annual operating cost: $814,050;
" Constrained Service Plan
The Constrained Service Plan includes two routes modified from the original
three that cover most areas served in the Strategic Service Plan. Service
frequency is 60 minutes. Estimated annual operating cost: $556,200;
• Multi-Phased Service Plan
The Multi-Phased Service Plan starts with implementation of a baseline route,
with service levels increasing as demand and/or funding opportunities arise. The
baseline route is designed to reach major attractors and areas underserved by
transit (i.e., City Hall, Temple City Library, Temple City Park, Downtown Temple
City, Live Oak Park, Rosemead Boulevard/Las Tunas Drive shopping centers,
and neighborhoods near Olive Street and Cloverly Avenue), and connect to
existing transit lines. Service frequency is 30 minutes with two buses operating
bi-directionally. This option allows the City to phase in additional service as
conditions deem appropriate. Estimated annual operating cost varies by stage;
and
City Council
December 3, 2013
Page 4 of 5
• Recommended Service Plan
Due to the limitation of immediately available funds, DTS recommends piloting a
transit service with limited operation of the baseline route. One vehicle would
travel in a loop, reaching major attractors and connecting to existing transit.
Service frequency is 30 minutes. This option allows the City to operate a program
on current funding levels, and expand per the Multi-Phased Service Plan as
opportunities arise. Estimated annual operating cost: $278,100.
In soliciting vendors for transit operations, there is opportunity to realize savings from
the above estimated numbers by contracting services in conjunction with DAR The City
will be issuing a DAR RFP in spring of next year, the City will request that respondents
submit proposals for DAR and additional transit services-including fixed-route
operations, as well as a general population DAR. At this time, details beyond system
operation are preliminary. DTS has provided in their Alternatives Analysis Report
information about vehicles (e.g., clean air technology, purchase and lease options, etc.)
and available funding opportunities for capital costs. However, staff recommends that
the City first understand the feasibility and sustainability of transit operations, before
committing any resources toward capital expenditures (i.e., transit stop placards, capital
expenses, vehicle acquisition, etc.).
CONCLUSION:
In the City's ongoing efforts to enhance government services, the addition of a fixed-
route transit system would not only provide residents increased mobility options, but
also further several City Council objectives (e.g., basic City services, sustainable
infrastructure, public safety, economic development, etc.), and fulfill policy
recommendations from recent planning efforts. However, given limited resources for
implementation, staff's recommendation at this time is to conceptually approve DTS's
Study and the Recommended Service Plan, and solicit vendor proposals next spring in
conjunction with the DAR service operations RFP process. Doing so would allow the
City to operate a program within current funding levels, while still facilitating access to
downtown businesses, and addressing traffic calming and parking issues. Meanwhile,
consolidating the RFP process with DAR would enable the City to better understand
operations costs, and realize possible savings from economies of scale by contracting
with one vendor to provide multiple services.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact at this time. Should a vendor submit a bid at a feasible cost
during the consolidated Spring 2014 DAR RFP process, there is up to $167,000 for
fixed-route transit program costs through the end of FY 2013-14 (i.e., June 30, 2014).
City Council
December 3, 2013
Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENT:
A. Fixed-Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis Report
B. Meeting Minutes-July 24, 2013 Special Joint Meeting of the Parks and
Recreation, and Public Safety Commissions
C. Meeting Minutes-September 18, 2013 Special Joint Meeting of the Parks and
Recreation, and Public Safety Commissions
CITY OF TEMPLE CITY
FIXED ROUTE STUDY
FINAL REPORT
Prepared By :
DIVERSIFIED
TRANSPORTATION
SOLUTIONS
In Association With:
Evan Brooks Associates
Kam Research
NOVEMBER 2013
ATTACHMENT A
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
EXISTING CON D IT I 0 NS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7
COMMUNITY 0 UTR EACH --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------29
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS------------------------------------------------------------------------------------33
FUND I NG 0 PPORTU N ITI ES -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------71
MARKETI NG ST RATEGIES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------77
IM PLE MENT AT ION PLAN --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------79
APP END I X ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A -1
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Map of the City of Temple City -----------------------------------------------------------------------8
Figure 2: Activity Centers in Temple City --------------------------------------------------------------------10
Fig u re 3: Po pulation Density by Census Block Gro up ----------------------------------------------------13
Figure 4 : Median Household Income--------------------------------------------------------------------------14
Fig u re 5 : Med ian Age of T emple City Res idents -----------------------------------------------------------16
Fig ure 6 : Pe rcentage of Population Age 65 or O lder------------------------------------------------------17
Fig u re 7 : Pe r centage of Population Under the Age of 18 ------------------------------------------------18
Figur e 8 : Zero Vehicle Households----------------------------------------------------------------------------19
Figure 9 : Transit Routes Se rv ing T emp le City--------------------------------------------------------------21
Figure 1 0 : Public Transit Usage in Tem pie City ------------------------------------------------------------22
Figure 11 : Proposed Study Route 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------37
Figure 12: Proposed Study Route 2---------------------------------------------------------------------------4 0
Figu re 13: P roposed S tu dy Rou t e 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------42
Figure 14: Proposed Study Route s 1, 2 and 3 --------------------------------------------------------------44
Figure 15: Proposed St udy Route 4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------48
Figure 16 : Proposed Study Rou te 5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------51
F igure 17: Proposed Stud y Route s 4 an d 5 -----------------------------------------------------------------53
Figure 18 : Mu lti-P h ased Rou t e Network ---------------------------------------------------------------------58
Fig ure 19 : Rec ommended Baseline Route------------------------------------------------------------------66
Figu r e 20 : Trolley-Style T r ansit Bu s Operated by LAD OT -----------------------------------------------68
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Major T rave l Corridors in Temple City-------------------------------------------------------------11
Table 2: Populatio n Density of T em pie City and Neighboring Citi es ----------------------------------12
Table 3: Median Househo ld Income for Temple City and Neighboring Cities-----------------------12
Table 4: Service Frequency of Transit Routes in Temple City------------------------------------------23
Table 5: Five Most Heavi ly Used Bus Stops in Temple City on Weekdays --------------------------23
Table 6 : Study Route 1 Proposed Bus Stops ---------------------------------------------------------------38
Table 7: Study Route 2 Proposed Bus St ops ---------------------------------------------------------------39
Table 8: Study Route 3 Proposed Bus Stops ---------------------------------------------------------------43
Table 9: Estimated Running Times for Study Rou tes S-1, S-2 and S-3 ------------------------------45
Table 10: Estimated Service Performance for St udy Routes S-1, S-2 and S-3---------------------46
Table 11 : Study Route 4 Proposed Bus Stops -------------------------------------------------------------49
Table 12: Study Ro ute 5 Proposed Bus Stops -------------------------------------------------------------52
T able 13: Estimated Running T ime s f o r Study Ro utes S-4 and S-5-----------------------------------54
Table 14: Estimated Service Performance for Study Routes S-4 and S-5 ---------------------------54
Table 15: Phases I and II Proposed Bus Stops-------------------------------------------------------------59
Table 16: Phase Il l Route Proposed Bus Stops------------------------------------------------------------60
Table 17: Phase IV Route Proposed Bus Stops------------------------------------------------------------61
Table 18: Phase V Ro ute Proposed Bus Stops------------------------------------------------------------62
T able 19: E stimated Running Times for Multi-Phased Service Plan ----------------------------------63
Table 20: Estimated Service Perfor mance for Mu lti-Phased Plan -------------------------------------64
Table 21: Estimated Ru nni ng Times for the Baseline Route--------------------------------------------67
Tab le 22: Estimated Service Performance for Baseline Route-----------------------------------------67
Table 23: FY 2014 Local Return Funds Esti mates--------------------------------------------------------75
Table 24 : Projected Costs-Year 1 (Veh icle Lease Optio n)--------------------------------------------79
Table 25: Projected Costs-Year 1 (Vehicle Pu rch ase Option)----------------------------------------79
T abl e 26: T imel in e of Key Start-Up Activities ---------------------------------------------------------------79
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In January 2013, Diversified Transportation Solutions , assisted by Evan Brooks Associates and
Kam Research , began an analysis of transit service options for the City of Temple City. The
following report provides an outline of the activities undertaken in the assessment of transit
service operation in Temple City, and the development of transit service alternatives.
The development of transit service options considered information obtained during an
assessment of the existing environment for transit service in the city, and feedback from the public
and community stakeholders during an extensive public outreach effort. The report provides a
series of transit service alternatives to be considered for transit service operation in Temple City.
These alternatives are based on a set of principles developed to guide the design of the transit
route network, and the resources required to operate each service alternative is id entified. Also
included are potential sources in funding for transit operational and capital costs, marketing
strategies designed to inform the public of transit service attributes, and costs and activities
associates with service implementation.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The assessment of Existing Conditions provides background on the many unique attributes of the
City of Temple City, with a particular emphasis on the assessment of those characteristics of the
community that may indicate the potential for development of local fixed-route transit in the city.
In assessing existing conditions in Temple City that could signify potential for the development of
a local fixed-route transit system, the demographic profile of Temple City does not display the
characteristics of a heavily transit-dependent community. The income levels of residents are
higher on average than most neighboring cities, and nearly all hous eholds have access to
automobiles for their travel needs. However, there are a number of factors that have been
identified where transit service could be attractive to residents for their local travel needs, and
could provide an enhancement to the quality of life in the city. These factors includ e the following:
• AGE OF RESIDENTS
Within Temple City, 15.1% of residents are age 65 or older, and there is has been a consistent
usage of dial-a-ride services over the past several years. Given that seniors often travel within
their local communities for shopping and medical trips, and the current level of patronage of dial-
a-ride services, there could be opportunities for local fixed-route transit service to meet those
needs.
Additionally, the distance of the local intermediate school and area high schools from many
neighborhoods could also provide an opportunity to attract students for trips to and from school
during weekday peak periods.
• PROXIMITY OF TRANSIT TO NEIGHBORHOODS
Both Metro and Foothill Transit operate bus service on the primary arterial streets in Temple City.
But most of these routes do not operate very frequently, and require long walks from
neighborhoods to the bus stop. The operation of a local bus service that provides closer access
into neighborhoods, serves local activity centers and connects with other transit services that link
the greater region could attract more residents to use transit.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORT AT/ON SOLUTIONS Page 1
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Study Executive Summarv
• PLANS FOR IMPROVED CIRCULATION AND DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION
Several recent studies undertaken by Temple City have focused on the desire to improve traffic
flow, manage the amount of available parking in the downtown area, and revitalize commercial
activity in Downtown Temple City. Th e implementation of a local transit service could complement
these efforts by providing more direct access via public transit between neighborhoods and the
downtown area, reducing the number of vehicular trips to Downtown Temple City, and providing
a means for residents to travel within the city without using their cars.
• FUTURE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
Temple City currently receives nearly $1.3 million annually in transportation funding from
Proposition A, C and Measure R allocations. While a portion of these funds are being used for
transportation infrastructure projects such as the Rosemead Blvd . Improvement Project, in the
future this funding could be used towards the operation of a fixed-route bus system . Potential
future funding sources fo r both capital and operational expenses of fix ed -route transit service will
be examined in greater detail in a future analysis of funding opportunities.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
To gather information on transportation needs and to provide the community the opportunity to
participate directly in the study process, the City hosted a Community Workshop on April 24, 2013
at the Temple City Historical Society. Approximately 75 residents and stakeholders attended the
workshop where they received a presentation on the objectives of the project, and participated in
a discussion about the community's local transportation needs.
During the community workshop residents identified several locations that they would like to be
able to access with a local transit service. These locations including local and regional shopping
centers, regional transit centers such as El Monte Station and the Metro Gold Line , the Temple
City Senior Center at Live Oak Park and Temple City High School.
As part of the fixed-route study, a community transit survey was developed as a tool to assist in
determining the public 's knowledge and opinion of public transit, local travel patterns, current use
and frequency of existing transportation options, and potential use and desired destinations if a
local system were available. The key findings of the survey are listed below.
• Eighty-six percent {86%) of respondents indicated that they were residents of Temple
City
• Respondents were nearly evenly divided between males (48%) and females (51%)
• The majority of responses were from the age groups of 30-49 and 50-60+, with only
6% of responses provided by persons between the ages of 20-29 and 4% from
persons under the age of 19
• Forty-nine percent (49%) of respondents reported that they walk and bike locally
• Twelve percent of survey respondents (12%) currently use public transit for their local
transportation needs
• Dial-a-Ride service is used by 20% of respondents for their local travel
• Ninety-two percent (92%) of respondents indicated their support for a city-wide transit
system
• Eighty-five percent (85%) of survey respondents wou ld use the transit for their local
transit needs
DIV£RSIFI£D TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 2
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Executive Summary
• Seventy-five percent (75%) of all respondents consider environmental concerns when
it comes to their travel options
• Regarding the optimal fare level for local transit service, respondents indicated their
likelihood of utilizing a new local transit system based on the following base fares:
o 72% of respondents would use local transit service at a fare of $0.25
o 46% of respondents would use local transit service at a fare of $0.50
o 23% of respondents would use local transit service at a fare of $0.75
o 15% of respondents would use local transit service at a fare of $1.00
• Respondents were asked to rate the importance of specific features if a local transit
system were provided:
o Service within your local community-85%
o Service beyond your local community-77%
o Service to regional destinations -68%
o Daytime service -86%
o Evening service-66%
o Weekend service -81%
o Wheelchair accessibility-57%
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Several potential operating alternatives were developed and assessed for their potential to offer
effective transit service to Temple City. Each alternative was developed based on a set of
principles to guide the design of the transit route network. These principles are intended to guide
development of a local transit route network that would encourage the use of transit by residents
for travel within the City of Temple City, and for access to surrounding communities.
• Transit Service Should Serve The Downtown Commercial Core
• Transit Service Should Provide Convenient Circulation Within The City To Key Activity
Centers And Schools
• Transit Service Should Provide Access Into Neighborhoods And Address Unserved
Corridors
• Transit Service Should Provide Connections To The Surrounding Local And Regional
Bus Network
Based on the network design principles described above, and feedback provided by city staff and
community representatives, Diversified Transportation Solutions has developed a series of
operating scenarios for consideration in the development of a local fixed-route transit system to
serve the Temple City community.
• The Strategic Service Plan alternative represents the level of transit service that
could be provided using a higher allocation of the estimated annual transportation
funding available to the city. In the strategic service plan, three circulator bus routes
are recommended for operation that would each serve different areas of the city. The
routes are labeled S-1, S-2 and S-3 ("S ' stands for "Study Route"). Each route is
centered in Downtown Temple City to allow transfers between the routes and to
facilitate access to the Downtown core.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 3
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Executive Summary
• The Constrained Service Plan scenario represents a level of transit service provided
using a lower allocation of the estimated annual transportation funding available to the
city. The constrained plan consists of two bus routes, instead of the three routes
described in the strategic service plan. The two alternative routes were designed to
cover most of the areas served by Study Routes S-1, S-2 and S-3, but some street
segments would not be served, including Las Tunas Dr. between Rosemead Blvd. and
Cloverly Ave., Broadway east of Rosemead Blvd., and Encinita Ave. south of Las
Tunas Dr. Also, the frequency of service would be less than the strategic plan, with
bus service operating every 40 minutes as in the strategic service plan and every 60
minutes in the constrained service plan.
• The Multi-Phased Service Plan alternative was developed in response to feedback
offered by representatives of the City's Parks and Recreation and Public Safety
Commissions to provide an alternative service plan similar to the previous two
alternatives that could be implemented in phases. Commissioners also wanted to
assess the impact of providing a higher frequency of transit servic e in this alternative.
• Finally, the Recommended Service Plan alternative outlines the recommendations
of the consulting team for initial operation of a baseline transit route serving Downtown
Temple City and several key activity centers and neighborhoods surrounding the
downtown area. T his alternative provides the opportunity to evaluate the productivity
of transit service in a cost-effective manner, and allows for future expansion of the
transit network as funding allows.
For the procurement of vehicles, an assessment should be made regarding the type of buses that
would be most effective in providing transit service, and the preferred method to acquire buses,
either through leasing or purchase.
Given the estimated range of ridership on the transit system at 15-20 boardings per hour, the use
of smaller 30-foot buses with seating capacities of approximately 30 passengers (or 23
passengers and 2 wheelchair securement spaces) would provide sufficient capacity for daily
service operation. City staff has also indicated an interest in the operation of trolley-style transit
vehicles that could provide a historic look to transit service while also operating in a cost-efficient
manner.
Based on the cost factors associated with leasing versus purchase of buses, if the City of Temple
City were to acquire two buses for the operation of the recommended baseline route as an initial
phase of transit service, the following recommendations are provided by the consulting team:
• If the City desired to implement transit service and assess the level of service
performance for a period of time (i.e., a 1-2 year period) before committing to longer-
term service operation, leasing of buses would be preferable. This provides the City
an opportunity to operate transit service with a lower capital cost outlay before funding
the purchase of long-term assets.
• If the City planned to commit to longer-term fixed-route transit service operation, or
planned to use purchased vehicles for other transportation uses such as dial-a-ride
service, then the purchase of buses would be preferable . This is due to the longer
term costs disadvantages of leasing, and the potential value derived from resale of the
vehicles if desired.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 4
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Executive Summary
FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
This chapter of the report provides an ove rvi ew of the various federal, state, and regional transit
funding sources that the City of Te mpl e City may use to implement its local transit system.
Funding is either programmed annually on a formula basis or as competitive grants. The planning
of Temple City's local transit system should include a clear understanding of each funding
program's requirements in order to be able to leverage limited local recourses to implement the
proposed transit system.
MARKETING STRATEGIES
A local transit system 's ultimate success depends on how w ill it meets the mobility need s of its
users, and influence the tra vel behavior of potential future users. Marketing plans provide a
strategic approach to addressing these issues by identifying goals, target markets, and
developing strategies for enhancing a transit system's imag e and ridership.
The marketing plan should id en tify specific strategies and tactics to be used in achieving the
previously id en tified marketing goals and objectives and to address the var ious target market
segments. Marketing strategies may includ e:
• Branding and Passenger Information
• Awareness and Image Building
• Targeted Ridership Strategies
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
For the implementation of the recommended transit service plan, the estimated costs of key start-
up activities for the first year of service are outlined below. The projected costs assume both an
option with the leasing of buses and an option that includes bus purchase costs.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORT AT/ON SOLUTIONS Pages
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Executive Summary
Key milestone activities for the start-up of transit service are listed below. The timeline of activities
assumes service implementation in July 2014.
Timeline of Key Start-Up Activit ies
' · · ..•. Activity . . 'I r·w •.• ·:\'h' ·r. ..... :,-..... ~~r~·· J""" .,. . .·-~ ·o-. •r·v ~ ~ ,.~ , .. .. -. ::•.· .•.. 7!t, .. ,'·"· ,.1, :4.~,, }..:•r~~ l !llP.J~mentattoiJ ; ate~::.~.~ :.i-~
Develop_ RFP for Transit Service Operation Dec 2013
Issue RFP January 2014
Begin Procurement Process for Buses January 2014
Development of T ransit Schedules February 2014
Select Transit Service Provider April2014
Marketing/Public Outreach May 2014
Install Bus Stop Signage June 2014
Begin Transit Service Operation July 2014
Evaluation of Transit Service Produ ctivity At 6 Months and 1 Year After Start-Up
DIVERSIFIED TRA NSPORTA TI ON SOLUTIONS Page 6
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The assessment of Existing Conditions provides background on the many unique attributes of the
City of Temple City, with a particular emphasis on the assessment of those characteristics of the
community that may indicate the potential for development of local fixed-route transit in the city.
This section includes information on demographic attributes of the community that often impact
the propensity for transit use such as income, age and auto availability. Also included in this
review is an identification of key activity centers serving Temple City residents, existing public
transportation services provided to residents, and recent studies and reports on major capital
investments occurring within the city that could have an impact on the development of transit
services.
COMMUNITY SETTING
• LOCATION
The City of Temple City is located in Los Angeles County in the Western San Gabriel Valley. Its
neighboring cities are Arcadia to the northeast, El Monte to the southeast, Rosemead to the
southwest, and San Gabriel to the west. Temple City is also bordered by several unincorporated
communities on its east, west, northwest, and north borders. The City is approximately four
square miles in size. Figure 1 highlights the location of Temple City and surrounding communities.
• KEY ACTIVITY CENTERS
There are a number of locations within Temple City that generate vehicular and pedestrian travel
from residents. These activity centers include schools, parks, shopping, and civic institutions.
With the boundaries of the city, there are 6 public schools serving students in Temple City. T hese
schools include Temple City High School, Oak Avenue Intermediate School , and several
elementary schools, including Cleminson Elementary, Cloverly Elementary, La Rosa Elementary
and Longden Elementary. There are also 2 major private schools in the city, St. Luke the
Evangelist Catholic School and First Lutheran School.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 7
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Conditions
\
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 1: Map of the City of Temple City
City of Temple City
Pn!pared March 20L3 bv lam Research~ for Dive rsified E ~---Source-: D~rsmedTranspartaUon SoluUons. l OU. b ~ ~ --~-.--· .. ····"·--The Cfty of Temple Ctty dor.1 not anume 1ny responsibility for
1 r l'le aceura cv of t his map.
UNAUTHORIZED REPROOUCTION,DISTR18UTION, OR
RETRANSMISS ION OF Tlfl5 MAP IS STRICTLY PRO HIBillD.
Page 8
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Conditions
Because surrounding school district boundaries include portions of Temple City, a number of
students living in Temple City attend elementary and high schools that are located outside the
city limits. These schools include Arcadia High School in Arcadia; Rosemead High School in the
City of Rosemead; Emperor Elementary in San Gabriel; and Gidley Elementary and Arroyo High
School in El Monte.
The Civic Center complex is located in the heart of Downtown Temple City on Las Tunas Drive
and includes City Hall, the Temple City Library and Temple City Park.
Another major community activity center is Live Oak Park, located at 10144 Bogue St. The park
houses the Live Oak Park Community Center, which provides activities and programs for senior
citizens in the community.
There are several shopping centers in and around Temple City. One key shopping district is the
Downtown Temple City area, located along Las Tunas Drive primarily between Sultana and
Rowland Aves. The downtown area is known throughout the Greater Los Angeles area for its
concentration of bridal shops. Other local shopping centers include Elm Center Shopping Center
located at Rosemead Blvd. and Las Tunas Drive; and Temple City Square Shopping Center
located at Rosemead Blvd. and Longden Ave. A large regional shopping center, the Santa Anita
Fashion Park, is located in the city of Arcadia, a short distance north of Temple City.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 9
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
I\
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 2: Activity Centers in Temple City
City ofTemple City
e I..De~~CW.m,ent: Ill Shapplhtl Cil'fttll:'t
• P•<b • S.nlorc..-. . '""""
~ I L r +===· =±=;' I Pr·-"""'-•rlD13byiCamAtiu rch,forlliwr>iied ~ t t: ~--_ __ Trans~bon SolutiON
\ 1 SouJU : O:venitied Transpol'tlt lon Solucions...lOU.
Information ln this mo~p Is fwnlshtd strictty as a convenN!nOI!~
The City of Temple City dot:s not aswme a"'(responsibilttyfar
f'--------ir-----1 ~~::;~z~f~~~~60uCTJON ,DIS'mi8UTION, OR
RfTRA~SIV\15SION OF Tlil5 MAP IS STRICnY PROHIBITED.
Page 10
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
• MAJOR TRAVEL CORRIDORS
The street network in Temple City was developed in a grid pattern, with most streets running
north-south and east-west in the grid. As indicated by the Caltrans Street Classification System,
the major roadways in Temple City are classified as Primary, Secondary, Collector and Local.1
Table 1 lists the classification of major roadways in Temple City.
Both Metro and Foothill Transit operate bus service on the primary road ways in Temple City. But
there are no fixed-route transit services operating on secondary, collector and local streets that
provide closer access to neighborhoods.
DEMOGRAPHIC ANAL YS/5
The demographic characteristics of a community provide background on the residents who live
there , and can often highlight indicators of the potential for transit use, particularly in areas such
as income leve ls , the age of residents, and the availability of an automobile in th e household.
Demographic characteristics of Temple City residents from the recent 2010 U.S . Census are
discussed in this section of the report. To offer some context for data provided in several
demographic areas, information from the neighboring cities of Arcadia, El Monte , Rosemead and
San Gabriel are also included.
• POPULATION
The population of the City of Temple City is 35,558 according to the 2010 U.S. Census. The
ethni city of residents in Temple City includes 55.7% of residents being of Asian descent, 33.6%
White, and 19.3% of residents being of Hispanic descent.2
1 City of Temple City Traffic Calming Master Plan, November 2012, pg. 2-14
2 Because of the methodology used by the u.s. Census to determi ne ethnicity, figures do not total100%
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 11
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Conditions
The population density in the City of Temple City is approximately 8,827 persons per square mile
based on information provided by the 2010 U.S. Census.
Table 2 compares the population density of Temple City and neighboring San Gabriel Valley
cities.
As indicated in Figure 3, neighborhoods in the northeastern corner of the city are somewhat more
densely populated than the rest of the city.
• INCOME
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the median household income in Temple City is $65,445.
Table 3 compares the median household income of Temple City and surrounding San Gabriel
Valley cities.
Several neighborhoods adjacent to Rosemead Blvd. and located to the west and south of the
Civic Center area have lower than average median incomes than the city as a whole.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 12
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
Figure 3: Population Density by Census Block Group
\
0 i ~-fi
1 jl
l
u.aOak."'ve
• f' ··-=-, .J;.-'-~. Q,.,ad'NIY
~~ ..---:: "t •• ()heSl
... 1 _ _,--' _l--~
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Population Density by Census Block Group
Gtyo/Tnnpta City
Persons Per Square Mil e.
s.as.t to 7,ooo ~ 10,000tG11.000
7,00C to l~ ~ u~ooot.o u,u:z
I,AOO to 1.0,000
e local GCIV«MMilfl't -Shopplrw CtMI'r
A, Parir' e M nioi"Centen . """"'
Prepared M<I'Y 201! by K;m Researc h, for Divers ified
Tr.an~portatlon Solutions
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Summary Ffle 1. 2011: a nd
U.S. Census Bureau 20lll1GER/Lin e Shapeflle$., 2011.
Page 13
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 4: Median Household Income
Median Household Income by Blo.ckGroup
Household Income In Past 12 Months
S.Joi.&02. to SSO.OOO 1/fJ-SlO,ooct~ 590,000
$.50,000 to $70,000 1/fJ-$.90,000 lD $ll6,:UD
Loaf C....:'"""cnl -Shopplac Q:ntu
htb e Scnror~
. ......,
Prepared May 2013 by Ka m Re:seart.h, for Ofvenlfied --4= ~I Tr.onsportotlonS<>I utlons l ~
1
1 Source~ U.S. CRnru5 8ure1u 2007·2011 AC5 5-Y~iilr Summiilry FUeo,
I --........ lOll: and u.s. Ceruw; BureOI U 2011 nGER/lin• Shapf"fil e5, 2011.
lnkwmiltion In this m1g is tum1shed strictfy ~ il conwnKmco.
Thl! City of Temple Oty~s nat assume any ll!sponslbnltytor
:--ii-----+---r---f---l-1 ~~'.:"a:::'o"oucnON,OIST'RIBUnDIO,OR
OF THIS MAP IS
Page 14
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Conditions
• AGE
The median age of residents in Temple City is 43 years of age. The relative age of the local
population often provides an indicator of potential transit use as students may use transit for travel
to and from school, and the elderly often us e fix ed-route transit and paratransit services for
medical trips and local shopping.
Two areas in the city have a higher than average median age, the neighborhood surrounding Live
Oak Park, which also includes the Santa Anita Convalescent Hospital; and the neighborhood in
the far southwest corner of the city near El Monte and Grand Aves (see Figure 5).
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, approximately 15.1% of Temple City res idents are over the
age of 65. As shown in Figure 6, areas with higher than average number of elderly residents
include the northern portion of the city, and neighborhoods south of Live Oak Ave.
The percentage of Temple City residents under the age of 18 is 21.2%. As shown in Figure 7,
residents under the age of 18 are more prevalent in the western part of the city west of Baldwin
Ave.
• AUTO AVAILABILITY
Access to an automobile is another indicator for potential transit use. Persons without access to
a personal mode of travel have a high er likelihood of using transit services than those with multiple
automobiles. Nearly all households in Temple City have access to an automobile. Only 3.6% of
the households in the city do not have an automobile available for travel. As indicated in Figure
8, one neighborhood that does have a higher than average percentage of zero-vehicle
households is located to the west of Temple City Blvd. just south of Longden Ave. Within this
neighborhood , approximately 19.3% of households do not have access to an automobile.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 15
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Conditions
Figure 5: Median Age of Temple City Residents
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Median Age by Cens us Block Group
Cky of ft.,,. City
JBto5D.,Uts
.SDttt61years
e Lou I Uowmment • Sho'9lnc C.nttr
~ ,..,,b e SenlorGtntets
.S<hool
I Tra nsportation Solutions.
--l....J Sovree: U.S. C~n$Us Bu r!!oau 2010 Sum mary file l, 2011; ~nd ~ F ta~·~--.. "···-~b·-"· .ongd~"e ( -........L U.S. Census Bu<.,u 2011 TIGER/Line Shopellles, 20ll.
lnforma1ion ll'l lhls me~ ho furnbhed strk:liV iS a conv•n l~nc:e.
The City or Te:•nple: City doeJ not ~sume any reJponstblbty for
the :itturacy of this map.
UNAUTHORIZED REPROOUCTION,DISTftiElUTlON, OR
Page 16
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Condition s
Figure 6: Percentage of Population Age 65 or O l der
\
l
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
1
8
\
·~
Elderly Population by Census Block Group
Percent•J• of Population Elderly
ten then 1~ .,. ll" tc 20%
1 m6 to 1~ .,. 2mC. r:oCO%
e t.oc:at Govtnvnent • ShoPCI'Inc c~w
A l'wb • ,.,.Mont.., .........
~ ~ ta PreparedMay2013 byKamReseatcll, for Ohterslned
I 1-----------Tr.ansporto~tlon Sotut)oru.
l~ Source: U.S. Census Bureau 20lOSUmmarv fl lel, 2011; •nd
\:_ ( ..........___.__ U.S. Census Buruu 20U TlG ER/Une Shap~files. 2011.
. lnfonn11tion In this map is fum~d st rictly as a cai"M!n!Mce.
'Tlle Oty of Te.mple Clty does not anu~ any r~pan~Jbility lor
Page 17
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Conditions
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTA TION SOLUTIONS
Youth Popu l ation by Cen su s Bl ock Group
Pe rcentage of Po pulation Un de r 18
w~ than 1D1l GJ 15" to lOOK
J ""to15% ~ ltSto25"
e l tJUil GOYIU'nmcnl: • Shopplnc CenttU
& Pllks -s.nl« car.tw,
0 SChool
Prepi.rt!d Mo.v 2013 by Um Re~;m.h, (orOivetslfled
Tr.~.mpcrt.IIIUon So/uUons
Suun::e: U.S. CcnS\.1$ Burt=.a u 2010Summary Fil e 1, 2011; ~n d
U.S. Cens:us-BUR!IU 2011 1lGER/lile Sh.JIH!:flk!s, 20ll
lnfarmaUon In thl~ map k rurnllht-d strictly's a mnvt'nleM"e~
The Oty o! Temple Oty does f'I(J(_ auume MrV rt:~sibilty for I I ; I 1-J U..=ncyolthlsmap.
I • UNAUTlfORUEO fiEPROOUCTfON,DtSTRJBUTION, OR
Page 18
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existin g Conditions
DIVERSIFIED TRANS PORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 8: Zero Vehicle Households
Zero Vehicle Households by Block Group
CJryofTtmc~lectty
Percentage: of Occupied Ho using Un its
ttssthlnl% ~
l "toJ" Q
S"tolOK
l O"to 19.'1"
No Hottstholds Hr;t
ZlroV.htdes
t.oca1 c:;o..;.e,JWMJ\t II ShopplnJ ~ttr
Pilfk.t -S.'IIM CHIIM"' .., .. ,
Prepa~ May 2013 by Kolm R1U:u rch, for Dfvc!:r'$ified
\ ~ I 1' 1' 1 ( ~ -= ~ --1 Traruportaticn Solu tJons
-'-( -...........J._ soun:e-: U5. Ce!'sus BurcJ:u 2007·20ll ACS 5-Ye<~r Summa ry Flit',
20lli and U.S, Cenl-Us BortiU 21)11 TIGER/line 5hapefiii!.S, :ZOlL
lnformat)Qn in thlt m01p Is f\.rnlshed strktly as a convet~!ente.
\--+-------f---~----j--"'-1 The dty of Temple Otydo~ not~SSI.MTMI: <10\' rt!$p01Ubillty for
thr accur.~cy of thll map.
UNAUTHORIZED REPROOUCTION,OISTliiBVTION, OR
Page 19
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Conditions
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
• FIXED-ROUTE
Fixed-route public transportation services are provided in Temple City by two transit operators.
The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) provides regional transit
services throughout Los Angeles County, and Foothill Transit operates transit service primarily
within the San Gabriel Valley, with express services to Downtown Los Angeles.
Metro operates six bus routes that serve Temple City, local routes 78/378 (Las Tunas Drive), 266
(Rosemead Blvd.), 267 (Temple City Blvd.), 268 (Baldwin Ave.-Lower Azusa Rd.), and freeway
express routes 487 (Santa Anita Ave.) and 489 (Rosemead Blvd.). Foothill Transit operates
express route 492 along Santa Anita Ave. Figure 9 highlights the bus routes operating in and
around Temple City, and Figure 1 0 shows the current level of transit usage for various
neighborhoods in the city, while Table 4 provides information on days of operation and service
frequency for each bus route.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 20
T em pte City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
Figure 9: Transit Routes Serving Temple City
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Transit Routes Serving Temple City
CMyol1'tniJIItCit'l
" , ..
Foothill Tr.1nslt -... , ..
411
U1 -419
e Loa,~ ...... e ~p&d&CUitlf,
A, 'arb e Senlot c~m.n . ..,_,
IJr~pared May 2013 bv Kam Rost.arch, for Oi'vcrsiftt'!d
Ttaruporliltlon Solutkms
source: los: An1c.IC!S County Mcttopolit;n Tr~ns.porbtion
Authority, 20U; and !Cam Re.s:earth, 20H.
1nrormat1on In this m-ap ts furnished strictly as a conveni ence.
T1M! City o! Temple Cly does not ;usumc! anv responsJbt'ltty for
th<! acrur;~cy ol t hb map.
UNAVTHORIZ£0 REPROOUCTION ,OISTRIBUTION. OR
IS STRICTLY PROHIBrttO.
Page 21
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
Figure 10: Public Transit Usage in Templ e City
~ l --,8 b p= -l ' :c:: 1 N .-I PublicTransitUsagebyBiock Group
J nUnQiodpf ~ f I ~ -~
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Percentage of Workers 16 Y~ars and Older
teuth .. n l " I# 10WIO J4.S"
!SWS% Q Ho P,Wkn.mi!Usaee
s%ta l m5
l.oc.IJ GOIHI ~ftt • Shopp'nl; C.fltM
-Parks 4ll S.nkN' Cuttn . """"'
Prt!:pa re d May 2D13 by I<B m Re.seacch, for OiviH1.!fiCEd
Transportttlon Solutions
Saurte : U5. Census Bu reau 2007·2011 ACS S~Vur Summary File,
2012;arJnd U.S.,Cen sus Bure au 2011 TIGE.A/Llnc ShapafilC!S 1 2011.
rnforrmtion In thli m1p b furl1lshed n rklfy as a conve nience:.
i I The City of T2mpk!o City does M( assume ""V r69Un~i.bl!l ry f or
Page 2 2
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study
Metro
Line
78/378
Metro
Line
266
Metro
Line
267
Metro
Line
268
Metro
Line
487
Metro
Line
489
Foothill
Transit
Line
492
Seven Days
Seven Days
Seven Days
Seven Days
Seven Days
Weekday
Peaks Only
Seven Days
Weekday: 5:00a.m.-2:12a.m.
Saturday: 4:11 a.m.-2:12a.m.
Sunday: 5:02a.m.-2:12a.m .
Weekday: 4:18a.m.-11:14
p.m.
Saturday: 5:23a.m. -11 :23
p.m.
Sund 5:43a.m.-9:55 m.
Weekday: 5:28a.m.-8:28p.m.
Saturday: 5:31 a.m. -7:50 p.m.
Sunday: 5:31 a.m. -7:49p.m.
Weekday: 5:10a.m.-10:01
p.m.
Saturday: 5:42a.m.-9:06p.m.
Su :5:42a.m.-9:06 m.
Weekday: 5:20a.m.-10:39
p.m.
Saturday: 6:00a.m. -10:32
p.m.
Sund 6:00a.m.-10:33 .m.
Weekday (WB): 6:12a.m.-
8:05a.m.
Weekday (EB): 4:51 p.m.-
7:37 m.
Weekday: 4:53a.m.-10:16
p.m.
Saturday: 6:00a.m.-8:02p.m.
Su :6:00a.m.-8:02 m.
Existing Conditions
15 40 40
30 35 35
30 60 60
30 50 50
20 60 60
20
30 30 30
While Metro Line 78/378 operates at a high level of frequency during weekdays , most bus routes
operating in Temple City provide service at a frequency of approximately 30-60 minutes between
each bus trip on weekdays and weekends.
T he most five heavily utilized bus stops on weekdays in and around Temple City are listed in
Table 5. The majority of transit activity is along Las Tunas Drive and at transfer points between
Metro and Foothill Transit bus routes.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 23
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
• DIAL-A-RIDE
The City of Temple City also provides dial-a-ride services for elderly and disabled residents that
reside within the city limits of Temple City and several unincorporated areas adjacent to the city.
Dial-a-ride services are provided on a shared-ride basis to residents age 60 and above and
residents of any age with physical, psychological or developmental disabilities. Service is
provided seven days a week between the hours of 7:00a.m.-8:00p.m. Monday through Friday;
10:00 a.m .-5:00p.m. on Saturdays and holidays; and 9:00a.m.-5:00p.m. on Sundays. The
cost of the service is $0.50 per ride.
Trips can be made for any purpose for destinations within Temple City. Trips are allowed to the
communities of Arcadia , El Monte, Rosemead and San Gabriel, but are limited to trips for doctor
appointments, hospital visits, adult daycare facilities, government buildings, convalescent homes
and churches. Trips are also allowed to the Westfield Shopping Center in Arcadia and Home
Depot on Lower Azusa Rd. in El Monte.
Currently there are 1 ,485 Temple City residents registered for dial-a-ride services, and another
35 people registered that live in adjacent unincorporated communities. T he annual ridership for
dial-a-ride service has averaged approximately 20,000 rides between the years 201 0 through
2012.
Key locations that are frequently requested by dial-a-ride passengers within Temple City include
the Temple City Post Office, the Te mple City Library, Ralph's Grocery Market and K-Mart located
at Las Tunas Drive and Rosemead Blvd., the Temple City Square Shopping Center, and doctor's
offices located on Las Tunas Drive near Golden West Avenu e. Key locations served by dial-a-
ride outside Temple City include Methodist Hospital in Arcadia, 1st Baptist Church on Baldwin and
Woodruff Aves., and the San Gabriel Mission.
TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
The City of Temple City receives funds from various sources that are used to provide local
transportation for residents and that are allocated for improvements to transportation
infrastructure projects such as street repairs, traffic signalization and pedestrian amenities. Three
major sources of transportation funding that are provided to cities in Los Angeles County include
Proposition A, Proposition C and MeasureR funding.
Proposition A, in effect since 1982, provides funding for public transportation projects within Los
Angeles County through a one-half percent increase to the local sales tax. A total of 25% of these
funds are allocated to the cities in Los Angeles County using a formula based on population .
Local cities may use the funds to develop and improve local public transit, paratransit and related
transportation infrastructure in their cities. For FY2013, Temple City projected a total of $531,080
of Proposition A funding to be allocated to the city.
Proposition C, in effect since 1990, provides funding for public transportation projects within Los
Angeles County through an additional one-half percent increase to the local sales tax. Proposition
C funds are used for a variety of transportation projects and programs that improve transit service
and operations, reduce traffic congestion, improve a ir quality, and efficiently operate and improve
the condition of streets and freeways utilized by transit. A total of 20% of these funds are allocated
to the cities in Los Angeles County using a formula based on population. For FY2013, Temple
City projected a total of $440 ,560 of Proposition C funding allocated to the city.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 24
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Existing Conditions
Measure R was passed by voters in 2008, and provides funds for traffic reli ef and transportation
projects throughout Los Angeles County over the next 30 years. Through Measure R, funds are
allocated to local cities for projects such as street repairs and resurfacing, bikeways, pedestrian
improvements, streetscape improvements, traffic signal synchronization and local transit
services. For FY2013, Temple City projected a total of $330,000 of Measure R funding issued to
the city.
The City of Temple City presently uses their transportation funding for a number of projects
throughout the city. In FY2013 , a total of $687,030 is allocated to the Parks & Recreation
Department for public transportation programs. Within the public transportation program , the city
budgets $360,000 for the operation of dial-a-ride service, and another $185,000 to buy down the
price of Metro transit passes for residents. Funding from Propositions A and Cas well as Measure
R funds are also currently being used for the Rosemead Blvd. Improvement Project.
RECENT STUDIES AND REPORTS
The city has recently conducted several studies designed to enhance the quality of life for Temple
City residents by increasing commercial activity and improving transportation flow within the city.
A summary of each of these studies and their potential impact to local transit service is outlined
below.
• DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
The Downtown Specific Plan was developed based on a desire to revitalize the downtown core
of Temple City. With the advent of regional shopping centers, Las Tunas Drive has become less
competitive in merchandising. A major goal of the study is to identify methods to create a
"dynamic" downtown commercial core by creating detailed action programs and implementation
strategies for land use, building form, site design, streetscape, and economic development.
• DOWNTOWN PARKING STRATEGY
In response to concerns regarding the amount of public parking in the do wn town area, the City of
Temple City initiated a study and strategic plan to evaluate Downtown parking conditions, to
facilitate community input , and to develop recommendations to increase parking supply, manage
parking, and revise parking standards.
As part of the Transportation Demand Management (TOM) strategies outlined in the study, a
downtown transit shuttle was recommended to connect key destinations within the city. A transit
shuttle has the potential to better connect commercial areas in downtown with commercial activity
on Rosemead Blvd., as well as serving residential areas.
• BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
The Bicycle Master Plan was developed to improve conditions for bicycling within Temple City by
recommending improvements and policies to increase the number of people who bike, increase
the frequency and distance of bicycle trips, improve safety for bicyclists, and raise public
awareness and support for bicycling. The Plan provides direction for expanding the existing
bikeway network , connecting gaps, and ensuring greater local and regional connectivity.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 25
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
Specific recommendations of the Plan include development of bike paths , bike lanes and bike
routes , as well as establishment of a "bike boulevard" consisting of segments along Arden Dr.,
Freer St. and Olive St. The Plan also r ecommended that there be bicycle parking at all major trip
attractors, including commercial and civic activity centers and transit hubs in the City, with
particular attention directed at parks, schools, commercial/office areas, civic/government and
public transit stations. Future intermodal facilities established in the City should provide secure
bicycle parking as part of the facility's design.
• TRAFFIC CALMING MASTER PLAN
The Traffic Calming Master Plan was initiated to improve pedestrian safety by identifying locations
in the City where high speeds, high accidents and low traffic volumes exist. A high priority of the
Plan was placed around areas with high pedestrian activity such as parks and schools, where the
potential for pedestrian-involved accidents is th e greatest.
The plan lists the major traffic corridors in the city (see Table 1) and provides several
recommendations to improve pedestrian and vehicular safety in different areas of the city.
Recommendations for physical changes to streets (such as speed bumps and roundabouts) will
be considered in any transit route plans developed in the Fixed Route Study.
• ROSEMEAD BLVD. STREETSCAPE PROJECT
The City of Temple City is currently underway with an improvement project along Rosemead Blvd.
This project will update the street design to provide a pedestrian friendly corridor with landscaping,
sidewalks, protected bike lanes and public art.
In addition to the Rosemead Boulevard project, the City is underway on a similar redesign of Las
Tunas Drive to update the street into a pedestrian-friendly corridor with new pedestrian signals,
bike lanes, public art, outdoor dining, etc. Altogether, enhancements are geared toward
rejuvenating the downtown district along Las T unas Drive.
FINDINGS
In assessing existing conditions in Temple City that could signify potential for the development of
a local fixed-route transit system, the demographic profile of Temple City does not display th e
characteristics of a heavily transit-dependent community. The income levels of residents are
higher on average than most neighboring cities, and nearly all households have access to
automobiles for their travel needs. However, there are a number of factors that have been
identifi ed where transit service could be attractive to residents for their local travel needs, and
could provide an enhancement to the quality of life in the city. Additionally, a review of current
and possible future transportation funds available to the city may also provide a revenue source
for the costs required to implement and operate transit service.
A summary of findings from the existing conditions assessment are listed below.
• AGE OF RESIDENTS
Within Temple City, 15.1% of residents are age 65 or older, and there is has been a consistent
usage of dial-a-ride services over the past several years. Given that seniors often travel within
their local communities for shopping and medical trips, and the current level of patronage of dial-
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 26
Temple City Fixed Route Transi t Study Existing Conditions
a-ride services, there could be opportunities for local fixed-route transit service to meet those
needs.
Additionally, the distance of the local intermediate school and area high schools from many
neighborhoods could also provide an opportunity to attract students for trips to and from school
during weekday peak periods.
• PROXIMITY OF TRANSIT TO NEIGHBORHOODS
Both Metro and Foothill Transit operate bus service on the primary arterial streets in Temple City.
But most of these routes do not operate very frequently, and require long walks from
neighborhoods to the bus stop. The operation of a local bus service that provides closer access
into neighborhoods, serves local activity centers and connects with other transit services that link
the greater region could attract more residents to use transit.
• PLANS FOR IMPROVED CIRCULATION AND DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION
Several recent studies undertaken by Temple City have focused on the desire to improve traffic
flow, manage the amount of available parking in the downtown area, and revitalize commercial
activity in Downtown Temple City. The implementation of a local transit service could compliment
these efforts by providing more direct access via public transit between neighborhoods and the
downtown area, reducing the number of vehicular trips to Downtown Temple City, and providing
a means for residents to travel within the city without using their cars.
• FUTURE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
Temple City currently receives nearly $1.3 million annually in transportation funding from
Proposition A, C and Measure R allocations. While a portion of these funds are being used for
transportation infrastructure projects such as the Rosemead Blvd. Improvement Project, in the
future this funding could be used towards the operation of a fixed-route bus system. Potential
future funding sources for both capital and operational expenses of fixed-route transit service will
be examined in greater detail in a future analysis of funding opportunities.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 27
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Existing Conditions
(This page intentionally left blank)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 28
Temple City Fixed Route Transi t Study Community Outreach
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
This section provides an outline of the community outreach effo rts for the Temple City Fixed Route
Transit Study, and an analysis of the Community Transit Survey. To efficiently coordinate
community outreach efforts, and identify th e detailed steps required for implementation , a
Community Engagement Action Plan was developed in conjunction with city staff and the
consultant team . The community outreach effort included a community workshop, informational
surveys for residents and businesses, and a variety of public outreach efforts.
OUTREACH APPROACH
In preparation for community outreach efforts, the follo wing activities were undertaken to obtain
the broadest range of participation and feedback from community residents and stakeholders.
• IDENTIFICATION OF RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS
In coordination with city staff, a listing of local residents and stakeholders was developed to ensure
workshop participation. The list was compiled from the following:
• Residents at-large
• Chamber of Commerce Membership Directory
• Dial-a-Ride users
• Temple City Unified School District
• DEVELOPMENT OF PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS
Various outreach documents we re undertaken to inform the public of the fixed-route study and to
promote community outreach activities.
• Developed invitation flyer/mailer for community wo rkshop
• Stakeholder Invitation Letter
• Developed Community Surveys in English, Chinese and Spanish languag es
• OR Code cards developed in English and Chinese
• Drafted an article for the Chamber of Commerce newsletter with an invitation to attend
the community workshop
• DISTRIBUTION OF PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS
• Community surveys were uploaded to the "Survey Monkey" website with a link
provided on the City website
• Community surveys were distributed at the following locations:
o Bike Rodeo (March 23, 2013)
o Temple City Farmer 's Market (April 14 and April 21 , 2013)
o Dial-a-Ride customers
o City Website
• Invitations to the Community Workshop were hand delivered to all 14,420 households
in the city (April 9 and April 10, 2013)
• Community Workshop invitations were placed at Live Oak Park Community
Center/Senior Programs, Temple City Library, Chamber of Commerce, and City Hall
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 29
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Community Outreach
• Copies of Community Workshop invitations we re placed in the front offices at local
High Schools and Middle Schools
• Community Workshop invitations and storefront fl yers were e-mailed to all Chamber
of Commerce members
• OR Cards were disseminated at the follo wing:
o Bike Rodeo
o Farmer's Market
• Temple City staff released a press release regarding the Community Workshop during
the week of April 15 , 2013.
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
To gather information on transportation n eeds and to provide the community th e opportunity to
participate directly in the study process, the City hosted a Community Workshop on April 24, 2013
at the Temple City Histo rica l Society. Meeting notices were delivered to all14,420 Temple City
households during week of April 8, 2013, notices were also placed in the offices of local K-12
schools and e-mailed to Temple City Chamber of Commerce listed businesses.
Approximately 75 residents and stakeholders attended the workshop where they received a
presentation on the objectives of the project, and participated in a discussion about the
community's local transportation needs. Participants engaged in a series of individual table
exercises and were asked to identify their local travel patterns, travel origins and destinations,
and recommendations for bus routing and bus stop locations. To ensure full opportunity for
participation, language interpretation was provided in both Spanish and Chinese.
During the community workshop residents identified several locations that they wou ld like to be
able to access with a local transit service. These locations including local and regional shopping
centers, regional transit centers such as El Monte Station and the Metro Gold Line, the Temple
City Senior Center at Live Oak Park and Temple City High School.
Oth er local destinations identified in the workshop are listed below.
• Santa Anita Mall/Race Track
• Temple City High School
• Gold Line Station (Sierra Madre Villa)
• El Monte Bus Station/Metrolink
• Target (Rosemead)
• Department of Motor Vehicles
• Home Depot (EI Monte)
• 168 Market
• Local Churches
• Temple City Senior Center
• Rosemead Blvd./Las Tunas Dr. shopping area
• Sam 's Club
• Ralphs
• Civic Center (City Hall/Library/Pa rk)
• Kaiser (Baldwin Park/Pasadena)
• CVS/Big Lots (Arcadia)
• Wai-Mart
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 30
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Community Outreach
• County Medical Center (EI Monte)
• Super A Grocery Store
Participants also provided comments and preferences regarding the potential establishment of
transit service in Temple City. The most frequent comments are listed below.
• Buses should operate every 15-20 minutes
• Provide connections and coordinated schedules w ith transit in neighboring cities
• Transit information should be readily available on the city website
• ADA accessible buses
• Shuttle services should be provided for summer concerts
• Provide CNG or electric vehicles
• Operate weeke nd Service
• Service to Temple City High School
• Sunday routes to serve local churches
• How will transit service be funded?
• What types of buses are being considered?
• Bus shelters should be clean and well lit with transit maps and information
COMMUNITY TRANSIT SURVEY
As part of the fixed-route study a community transit survey was developed as a tool to assist in
determining the public 's knowledge and opinion of public transit, local travel patterns, current use
and frequency of existing transportation options, and potential use and desired destinations if a
local system were available. The results of this survey would assist in the development of
recommendations for the overall study.
The community transit survey was made available on the city's website, conducted at select
community events, and provided to dial-a-ride transit users. A total of 438 responses were
received.
• SURVEY ANAL Y$1$
Tabulation and analysis of the community transit survey responses revealed several key findings.
A statistical analysis and a detailed listing of all comments provided a greater depth of insight and
a better understanding of the needs of the community as it relates to development of a local transit
system.
The key findings of the survey are listed below.
• Eighty-six percent (86%) of respondents indicated that they were residents of Temple
City
• Respondents were nearly evenly divided between males (48%) and females (51%)
• The majority of responses were from the age groups of 30-49 and 50-60+, with only
6% of responses provided by persons between the ages of 20-29 and 4% from
persons under the age of 19
• Forty-nine percent (49%) of respondents reported that they walk and bike locally
• Twelve percent of survey respondents (12%) currently use public transit for their local
transportation needs
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 31
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Communi tv Outreach
• Dial-a-Ride service is used by 20% of respondents for their local travel
• Ninety-two percent (92%) of respondents indicated their support for a city-wide transit
system
• Eighty-five percent (85%) of survey respondents wo uld use the transit for their local
transit needs
• Seventy-five percent (75%) of all respondents consider environmental concerns when
it comes to their travel options
• Regarding the optimal fare level for local transit service , respondents indicated their
likelihood of utilizing a new local transit system based on the following base fares :
o 72% of respondents wou ld use local transit service at a fare of $0.25
o 46% of respondents would use local transit service at a fare of $0.50
o 23% of respondents would use local transit service at a fare of $0.75
o 15% of respondents would use local transit service at a fare of $1.00
• Respondents were asked to rate the importance of specific features if a local transit
system were provided:
o Service within your local community-85%
o Service beyond your local community-77%
o Service to regional destinations -68%
o Daytime service -86%
o Evening service-66%
o Weekend service-81%
o Wheelchair accessibility-57%
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 32
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND
In the following section, several potential operating alternatives were developed and assessed for
their potential to offer effective transit service to Temp le City. Each alternative was developed
based on a set of principles to guide the design of the transit route network. The resources
required to operate each service alternative is identified.
ROUTE NETWORK DESIGN
Route network design involves the identification of key linkages for passenger travel and the
routings required to provide these linkages . Determination of an effective routing plan for the
transit network is essential to the development of a transit system that meets the needs of its
potential users.
As a result of discussions with Temple City staff, a review of several city planning documents and
infrastructure improvement plans, and feedback from residents and businesses, several key
transit service design principles we re developed. These principles are intended to guide
development of a local transit route network that wou ld encourage the use of transit by residents
for travel within the City of Temple City, and for access to surrounding communities.
• TRANSIT SERVICE SHOULD SERVE THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL CORE
The City of T emple City has recently conducted several studies designed to increase commercial
activity in Downtown Temple City, and to manage the amount of available parking in the downtown
area. The Downtown Specific Plan was developed with the goal of revitalizing the downtown
core, and a Downtown Parking Plan was developed in response to concerns regarding the
amount of public parking in the downtown area. Fixed-route transit service operating in the
Downtown area could assist in meeting the goals of these plans by providing a convenient means
for residents to access Downtown Temple City to shop, and could reduce parking demand on and
around Las Tunas Blvd.
• TRANSIT SERVICE SHOULD PROVIDE CONVENIENT CIRCULATION WITHIN THE
CITY TO KEY ACTIVITY CENTERS AND SCHOOLS
Temple City residents provided comments regarding their potential use of transit service in
responses to the community survey conducted by Evan Brooks Associates, and at the community
workshop held on April 24, 2013. An important attribute for transit service expressed by residents
was having transit operate within the local community to provide access to local and regional
shopping centers, connections to regional transit service that serves transit centers such as El
Monte Station and the Metro Gold Line, and service to the Senior Center at Live Oak Park.
Weekend service was also indicated as a very important attribute by respondents
Service to local high schools was also noted by residents because the distance of the local
intermediate school and area high schools from many neighborhoods provides an opportunity to
attract students for trips to and from school during weekday peak periods.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 33
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
• TRANSIT SERVICE SHOULD PROVIDE ACCESS INTO NEIGHBORHOODS AND
ADDRESS UNSERVED CORRIDORS
Both Metro and Foothill Tr ansit operate bus service on the primary arterial streets in Temple City.
But most of these routes do not operate very frequently, and require long walks from
neighborhoods to the bus stop. The operation of a loc al bus service that provides closer access
into neighborhoods , serves local activity centers and connects with other transit services that link
the greater region could attract more residents to use tran sit.
• TRANSIT SERVICE SHOULD PROVIDE CONNECTIONS TO THE SURROUNDING
LOCAL AND REGIONAL BUS NETWORK
Several transit operators provide service in and around Temple City, including Metro, Foothill
T ransit , the Rosemead Explorer and El Monte Transportation. While each transifoperator serves
a different customer base with the area, opportunities exist to coordinate with these services and
facilitate movement throughout the city and the region at large. Also, transit service should
operate along a currently unserved segment of a major arterial street in the city, Lower Azusa
Road west of Baldwin Ave.
TRANSIT SERVICE PLAN OPTIONS
Based on the network design principles described above, an d feedback provided by city staff and
community representatives, Diversified Transportation Solutions has developed a series of
operating scenarios for consideration in th e development of a local fi xed -route transit system to
serve the Temple City community.
The Strategic Service Plan alternative represents the level of tran sit service that could be
provided using a higher allocation of the estimated annual transportati on funding available to the
city. In the strategic service plan, three circulator bus routes are r eco mm ended for operation that
would each serve different areas of the city. The routes are labeled S-1, S-2 and S-3 ("S' stands
for "Study Route"). Each route is centered in Do wntown Temple City to allow transfers between
the routes and to facilitate access to the Downtown core.
The Constrained Service Plan scenario represents a level of transit service provided using a
lower allocation of the es timated annual transpo rtation funding available to the city. The
con strained plan consists of two bus routes , instead of th e three routes described in the strategic
service plan. The t wo alternative routes were designed to cover most of the areas served by
Study Routes S-1, S-2 and S-3, but some street segments would not be served, including Las
T unas Dr. between Rosemead Blvd. and Cloverly Ave., Broadway east of Rosemead Blvd., and
Encinita Ave. south of La s Tunas Dr. Also, the frequency of service would be less than the
strategic plan, with bus service operating every 40 minutes as in the strategic service plan and
every 60 minutes in th e constrain ed service plan .
The Multi-Phased Service Plan alternative was developed in response t o feedback offered by
representative s of the City's Parks and Recreation and Public Safety Commissions to provide an
alternative service plan similar to the previou s two alternatives that could be implemented in
phases. Commissioners also wanted to assess the impact of providing a higher frequency of
transit service in this alternative.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 34
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
Finally, the Re comm e nd ed Servic e Pl a n alternative outlines the recommendations of the
consulting team for initial operation of a baseline transit route serving Downtown Temple City and
several key activity centers and neighborhoods surrounding the downtown area. T his alternative
provides the opportunity to evaluate the productivity of transit service in a cost-effective manner,
and allows for future expansion of the transit network as funding allows.
Service proposals are outlined in further detail in the following sections.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 35
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
STRATEGIC SERVICE PLAN
STRATEGIC SERVICE PLAN -ROUTE NETWORK DESIGN
• S-1 ROUTE
Route S-1 provides service to the northern and northwest areas of Temple City. The route is 5.6
miles in length, and would operate in a counter-clockwise direction starting on Golden West
Avenue and operating via the following route:
From Golden West Ave., then R-Las Tunas Dr., A-Kauffman Ave., R-Woodruff Ave., L-Golden
West Ave., L-Longden Ave., R-Temple City Blvd., L-Camino Real Ave., L-Oak Ave., R-Longden
Ave., L-Muscatel Ave., L-Las Tunas Dr., R-Rosemead Blvd., L-Broadway, L-Encinita Ave., R-Las
Tunas Dr., L-Kauffman Ave., R-Woodruff Ave., and R-Golden West Ave.
Route S-1 wou ld provide service to a number of activity centers in the city, including City Hall, the
Temple City Library, Temple City Park, Temp le City High School, Oak Avenue Intermediate
School, Temple City Square Shopping Center, shopping centers located at Las Tunas Dr. and
Rosemead Blvd., and the Do wntown Te mple City shopping district.
Route S-1 wo uld also provide connections to several regional transit routes for convenient travel
outside the city. Connecting transit routes include Metro Lines 78/378, 266, 267 and 489.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 36
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
Figure 11 : Proposed Study Route 1
Study Rou te 1 and A ctivity Ce nters
• local Gowmm•nt • Stlopplnt Center ... p;,,b • S•nlor C.r~r.tt • "'-'
Prepared May 2013 by IC:am Research, for Diversified
_ . _ _ _ Transpo rtation Solut !oros ~ ~ ~ ~~-·~·-·~-~--"-"" lnforrrt;)t lon In this m~p 15 fu rnished strict ly as a convenience . 1 . The City of Temple City does not assume any responsibility for
1\ \----t \--' · \ 1 I the accuracy of thl' rn~p.
~ UNAUTHORIZED REPROOUCTIO N,OISTR IBUTION, OR
t ' ~ RETRANSM ISSION OF THIS MAP IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 37
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
Proposed bus stops for Route S-1 are listed below. There are 26 proposed bus stops on Route
S-1, with bus stops located approximately 0.20-0.25 miles apart. Stops are provided at key
activity centers and at connections with other local and regional bus routes to allow transfer
activity.
Table 6: Study Route 1 Proposed Bus Stops
Golden West Ave. (Terminal) Muscatel Ave./Garibaldi Ave. (nearside)
Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (after right turn) Muscatel Ave./Hermosa Ave. (nearside)
Kauffman Ave./Woodruff Ave. (before right Las Tunas Dr./Muscatel Ave. (after left turn)
turn)
Golden West Ave./Garibaldi Ave. (farside) Rosemead Blvd./Las Tunas Dr. (after right
turn)
Longden Ave./Golden West Ave. (after left Broadway/Rosemead Blvd. (after left turn)
turn)
Longden Ave./Temple City Blvd. (before right Encinita Ave./Broadway (after left turn)
turn)
Temple City Blvd./Lemon Ave. (farside) Encinita Ave./Live Oak Ave. (nearside)
Camino Real Ave./Temple City Blvd. (after left Encinita Ave./Las Tunas Dr . (before right turn)
turn)
Oak Ave./Camino Real Ave. (after left turn) Las T unas Dr./Oak Ave. (farsideJ
Oak Ave./Lemon Ave. (nearside) Las T unas Dr./Temple City Blvd. (farside)
Longden Ave./Oak Ave. (after right turn) Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (after left turn)
Longden Ave./Rosemead Blvd. (nearside) Kauffman Ave./Woodruff Ave. (before right
turn)
Muscatel Ave./Lonqden Ave. (after left turn) Golden West Ave. (Terminal)
• S-2ROUTE
Route S-2 provides service to the southern and southwest areas of Temple City. The route is 6.5
miles in length, and would operate in a clockwise direction starting on Golden West Avenue and
operating via the following route:
From Golden West Ave., then R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Cioverly Ave., L-Oiive St., R-Baldwin Ave., R-
Lower Azusa Rd., L-Encinita Ave., R-Mission Dr., R-Rosemead Blvd., R-Las Tunas Dr., L-
Kauffman Ave., A-Woodruff Ave., and R-Golden West Ave.
Route S-2 wou ld provide service to a number of activity centers in the city, including City Hall, the
Temple City Library, Temple City Park, Ralph 's Market, St. Luke 's Catholic Church and School,
Cloverly Elementary School , Home Depot, Rosemead Park in the City of Rosemead, Rosemead
High School, shopping centers located at Las Tunas Dr. and Rosemead Blvd., and the Downtown
Temple City shopping district. Route S-2 would also provide bus service on a currently unserved
segment of Lower Azusa Rd. west of Baldwin Ave.
Route S-2 would also provide connections to several regional transit routes for convenient travel
outside the city. Connecting transit routes include Metro Lines 78/378, 266, 267, 268 and 489,
and a connection with the Rosemead Explorer in front of Rosemead High School.
Proposed bus stops for Route S-2 are listed below. There are 31 proposed bus stops on Route
S-2, with bus stops located approximately 0.20-0.25 miles apart. Stops are provided at key
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 38
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
activity centers and at connections w ith other local and regional bus routes to allow transfer
activity.
T bl 7 St d R t 2 P a e : UIY ou e dB St us ropose ops
Golden West Ave. (Terminal) Rosemead High School
Las Tunas Dr.fTemple City Blvd. (farside) Rosemead Blvd./Mission Dr. (after ri~ht turn)
Cloverly Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (after left turn) Rosemead Blvd./Lower Azusa Rd. (farside)
Cloverly Ave./Live Oak Ave. (farside) Rosemead Blvd./Pentland St. (farside)
Cloverly Ave./Broadway (nearside) Rosemead Blvd./Serano Dr. (farside)
Olive St./Cloverly Ave. (after left turn) Rosemead Blvd./Broadway (farside)
Olive St.fTemple City Blvd. (nearside) Rosemead Blvd./Las Tunas Dr. (before right
turn)
Olive St./Golden West Ave. (farside) Las Tunas Dr./Sultana Ave. (farside)
Baldwin Ave./Olive St. (after right turn) Las Tunas Dr./Lama Ave. (nearside)
Baldwin Ave./La Rosa Dr. (farside) Las Tunas Dr./Encinita Ave. (nearside)
Lower Azusa Rd./Baldwin Ave. (after right Las Tunas Dr./Oak Ave. (farside)
turn)
Lower Azusa Rd./ Golden West Ave . Las T unas Dr.fTemple City Blvd . (farside)
(nearside)
Lower Azusa Rd.!Temple City Blvd. (farside) Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (after left turn)
Lower Azusa Rd./Aiessandro Ave. (nearside) Kauffman Ave./Woodruff Ave. (before right
turn)
Encinita Ave./Lower Azusa Rd. (after left turn) Golden West Ave. (Terminal)
Mission Dr./Lower Azusa Rd . (after riqht turn)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 39
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 12: Proposed Study Route 2
Study Route 2 and Activity Centers
e LoaiGovcrrurttnt -~~rtl"CC.nte.r
~ P•rb e Stntor C:CMtrs . """"'
Prepared May 2013 by Kam R~sean;h, for O lto~ersUied
TtilnSportation Solutions ~ Source :Otverslfiedframport<ltlonSolut lons,2013.
Info r mation In this map Is furnished strictly as IJ convenle r\ce .
The City ofTemp le City does not assumf! any responslblllty for
the accuracy of tills map.
UNAUTHORIZED REPROOUCTlON,Dim iBUTION, OR
RETRANSM ISSION OF TH IS MAP IS STRiffiY PROHIBITED.
Page 40
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
• $-3 ROUTE
Route S-3 provides service to the eastern and southeastern areas of Temple City. The route is
6.6 miles in length, and would operate in a clockwise direction starting on Golden West Avenue
and operating via the following route:
From Golden West Ave., then L -Live Oak Ave., R-Baldwin Ave., L-Bogue St., L-Giickman Ave.,
R-Live Oak Ave., R-Santa Anita Ave., R-Lower Azusa Rd., R-EI Monte Ave., L-Freer St., R-Arden
Dr., L-Oiive St., R-Cioverly Ave., R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Kauffman Ave., R-Woodruff Ave., and R-
Golden West Ave.
Route S-3 would provide service to a number of activity centers in the city, including City Hall, the
Temple City Library, Temple City Park, Live Oak Park and Senior Center, the CVS store located
at Live Oak Ave . and El Monte Ave., Arroyo High School, Sam's Club, St. Luke's Catholic Church
and School, Cloverly Elementary School, Ralph's Market, and the Downtown Temple City
shopping district. Route S-3 would also combine w ith Route S-2 to provide greater transit access
within neighborhoods by providing transit service in both directions along Cloverly Ave. between
Las Tunas Dr., and Olive St., and along Olive St. between Cloverly Ave. and Baldwin Ave. (see
Figure 8).
Route S-3 would also provide connections to several regional transit routes for convenient travel
outside the city. Connecting transit routes include Metro Lines 78/378, 267, 268 and 487, Foothill
Transit Line 492, and a connection with the El Monte Transportation Red Route at Santa Anita
Ave. and Lower Azusa Rd.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 41
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 13: Proposed Study Route 3
Study Route 3 and Activity Centers
• Loal GovemmeM • Shopplf'IIC.fltar
~ ..... • Senior Centers • Scl!ool
f'~parNf May 1011 by Kam Research, ror Oiver1 1fied
TransportaHon So lutions t-----1----1 Source: Oiverslfl edTransport.at lon Solut ions, 20 13.
11'\formation In t his map I~ furnished strictly as a convenience. l \-The Clty cne:mple City does not usumo any respon~lblllty fo r
"L..., thcitccur.~cyof t"lsmap.
UNAUTHOR IZED REPRODUCT ION,OISTR IOUTION, OR
RETRANSMISSIO N OF THIS MAP IS STRICTLY PROHIBIT[Q.
Page 42
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
Proposed bus stops for Route S-3 are listed below. There are 32 proposed bus stops on Route
S-3 , with bus stops located approximately 0.20-0.25 miles apart. Stops are provided at key
activity centers and at connections with other local and regional bus routes to allow transfer
activity.
a e . U IY ou e T bl 8 St d R t 3 P ropose dB St us ops
Golden West Ave. (Terminal) Lower Azusa Rd./EI Monte Ave. (before right
turn)
Live Oak Ave./Golden West Ave. (after right El Monte Ave./Grand Ave. (farside)
turn)
Live Oak Ave./Baldwin Ave. (nearside) Freer St.IEI Monte Ave. (after left turn)
Bogue St./Baldwin Ave . (after left turn) Freer St./Halifax Rd. (nearside)
Li ve Oak Park & Senior Center Olive St./Arden Dr. (after left turn)
Live Oak Ave./Giickman Ave. (after right turn) Olive St./Baldwin Ave. (nearside)
Live Oak Ave./Hallowell Ave. (farside) Olive St./Golden West Ave. (farside)
Live Oak Ave./EI Monte Ave. (farside) Olive St.fTemple City Blvd. (nearside)
Live Oak Ave./McCullough Ave. _(nearside) Cloverly Ave./Olive St. (before right turn)
Santa Anita Ave./Live Oak Ave. (after right Cloverly Ave./Broadway (nearside)
turn)
Santa Anita Ave./Daines Dr. (nearside) Cloverly Ave./ Live Oak Ave. (nearside)
Santa Anita Ave./Freer St. (farside) Cloverly Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (before right
turn)
Santa Anita Ave ./West Hondo Pkwy. Las Tunas Dr.fTemple City Blvd. (farside)
(nearside)
4900 Santa Anita Ave. (Sam's Club) Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (after left turn)
Lower Azusa Rd./Santa Anita Ave . (after right Kauffman Ave./Woodruff Ave. (before right
turn) turn)
Lower Azusa Rd./Daleview Ave. (farside) Golden West Ave. (Terminal)
The combined route network would operate in a coordinated fashion to meet the route network
design principles of serving key local activity centers, providing greater neighborhood access to
transit service, linking with regional bus services and providing transit service on unserved
corridors.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 43
Temple Citv Fixed Route Trans it Studv Alternatives Analvsis
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 14: Proposed Study Routes 1, 2 and 3
Study Routes and Activity Centers
• Lool eicwer!Wfttnt e ~pptnccenter
& Parb e S.nlor t.n1us .......
, _ Prepared May 2013 by Kam Research, far DiYerslfled ARCAD IA-f ~ r .. Mportatlon Solutions t-------1---i Source: Ofvc:rsiOed Tr3nsportatlon SOlutions, 2013.
Information in this map Is fumlshed strictly as a convenience.
The City of Tem ple C!ty does not assume ~nv responsibility for
the accuracy of this m01p.
UN AUTHORIZED REPRODIJCTION,O/STRIBVT ION, OR
RETRANSMISS ION Of= THIS MI\P ts STRJCTlV PROHISJTEO.
Page 44
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analvsis
STRATEGIC SERVICE PLAN-RESOURCE PLANNING
Resource planning consists of the identification of the resources (i.e., buses, operating costs)
required to implement the route network plan, and estimation of the potential performance of the
transit system.
Several key themes were incorporated into the resource planning effort, including:
• Operation of a convenient frequency of service that would make transit service
attractive for patrons within the operational funding available
• A span of service that would meet the travel needs of users throughout the day
• The operation of weekend service
• A passenger fare level that is attractive for users, offsets a portion of service operating
costs, and is consistent with the fare rates of local peer transit systems
In developing the resource plan for the strategic plan operating scenario, a series of key
assumptions were included in the parameters of the operating plan. These assumptions and the
rationale associated with their inclusion in the operating plan are listed below.
-
• The service frequency for Routes S-1, S-2 and S-3 is 40 minutes. Given the length of
each route and the estimated running time for each route at 12 mph, this se rvice
frequency allows time to operate each trip and provide recovery time before the
beginning of the next trip. Table 9 indicates the estimated running times and recovery
time for each proposed route .
Table 9: Estimated Running Times for Study Routes S-1, S-2 and S-3
·Route .
1
-ESt. Rui\hirig Timi> , • . ReCo,very Time Total Trip Time .
(mm .) . ·· 1 . (mm .) and Reco\iery
-~-~---~~---~~~~~~~~1 ·.' ~~ . . -._ --~(min.) __
S-1 29 11 40
S-2 33 7 40
S-3 33 7 40
• Service operation for each route would begin at 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, with the last
trip arriving at the transit terminal at 8:20 p.m. On weekends, service would start at
8:00a.m., with the last trip ending at 6:00p.m. This span of service allows passengers
to use bus service to access school, make connections to regional bus services for
work and medical trips, with operation late enough to complete shopping and social
trips.
• Each route would require the operation of 1 peak bus, for a total of 3 peak buses. One
additional bus would be included as a spare bus to maintain service reliability.
• The fare for each passenger trip is $0.50. This fare reflects comments received from
residents in the community survey regarding the preferred rate of fare for local transit
service.
• The operating cost is estimated at $60 per hour of service . This cost factor is
consistent with hourly service operating costs from local transit operators in the cities
of El Monte and Rosemead. This operating cost includes the cost of service operation ,
maintenance costs and administration .
DI VERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 45
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
• The estimated boardings are based on a rate of 20 boardings per service hour. This
is consistent with the rate of board in gs with local transit operators in the area including
service in the City of El Monte. This level of boardings is assumed to be reached by
the end of the first year of operation .
• SERVICE PERFORMANCE FOR STRATEGIC SERVICE PLAN
Based on the operating plan parameters out lined above, the three study routes would provide a
total of approximately 13,567 annual revenue hours of service between the three routes w ith
annual ridership estimated at 271 ,350 passengers. Tab le 10 highlights the estimated operational
performance of this service scenario.
Table 10: Estimated Service Performance for Study Routes S-1, S-2 and S-3
Ann. Rev. Hours 4,522.5 4,522.5 4,522.5 13 ,56 7.5
Ann. Rev. Mil es 37 ,800.0 43,875.0 44,550.0 126,225.0
Peak Vehicles 1 1 1 3
Ann. Board in gs 90,450 90,450 90,450 271,350
Ann. Operating $271,350 $271,350 $271,350 $814,050
Costs
Ann. Fare Revenue
(est. avg. fare $0.50) $45,225 $45,225 $45,225 $135 ,675
Farebox Recovery 16.7% 16.7% 16.7% 16 .7%
Subsidy per $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50
Boarding
As shown in the table, the annua l cost of operation in this service plan scenario is estimated at
$814,050. This operating cost would be offset by farebox revenue of $135,675, a farebox
recovery rate of 16. 7%. The subsidy per boarding for the operation of Routes S-1, S-2 and S-3
wou ld be $2.50 per passenger boarding.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 46
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analysis
CONSTRAINED SERVICE PLAN
CONSTRAINED SERVICE PLAN-ROUTE NETWORK DESIGN
The strategic plan would require nearly a full allocation of available transportation funds to wards
the operation of transit service. If the City does not desire to allocate this level of funds to wards
fixed-route transit service, the constrained plan outlined in the following section provides a means
to implement transit service within the city at a lo wer annual operating cost.
The constrained servic e plan scenario represents a level of transit service provided using a lo wer
allocation of the estimated annual transportation funding available to the city. The constrained
plan consists of two bus routes, instead of the three routes described in the strategic service plan.
The two alternative routes were designed to cover most of the areas served by Study Routes S-
1, S-2 and S-3, but some street segments would not be served, including Las Tunas Dr. between
Rosemead Blvd. and Cloverly Ave., Broadway east of Rosemead Blvd., and Encinita Ave. south
of Las Tunas Dr. Also, the frequency of service would be modified from service every 40 minutes
as in the baseline service plan to a 60 minute frequency of service.
• S-4 ROUTE
Route S-4 provides service to the eastern and southeastern areas of Temple City. The route is
8.9 miles in length, and would operate in a clockwise direction starting on Golden West Avenue
and operating via the following route:
From Golden West Ave., then L-Live Oak Ave., R-Baldwin Ave., L-Bogue St., L-Giickman Ave.,
R-Live Oak Ave., R-Santa Anita Ave., R-Lower Azusa Rd., R-EI Monte Ave., L-Freer St., R-Arden
Or., L-Oiive St., R-Cioverly Ave., L-Gariba!di Ave., R-Oak Ave., R-Camino Real Ave., L-Longden
Ave., and L-Golden West Ave.
Route S-4 would provide service to a number of activity centers in the city, including City Hall, the
Temp le City Library, Temple City Park, Live Oak Park and Senior Center, the CVS store located
at Live Oak Ave. and El Monte Ave., Arroyo High School, Sam's Club, St. Luke's Catholic Church
and School , Cloverly Elementary School, Ralph's Market, Oak Avenue Intermediate School and
Temple City High School.
Route S-4 w ould provide connections to several regional transit routes for convenient travel
outside the city. Connecting transit routes include Metro Lines 78/378, 267, 268, 487, and Foothill
Transit Line 492, and a connection w ith the El Monte Transportation Red Route at Santa Anita
Ave . and Lower Azusa Rd.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 47
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Al ternatives Analysis
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 15: Proposed Study Route 4
Study Route 4 and Activity Centers
e ~Gowrmn.nt e ihopplnc~l'ter
~ P.uks e SeftlorCftlte:n . "'-'
Prep$red June 2013 by IC~m Resurch, fot Dlversilfed
Transport ation Solutions t---------t---1 Source : DiveNifled Transportation Solu tions, 2013 .
Pa ge 48
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Anal vsis
Proposed bus stops for Route S-4 are listed below. There are 37 proposed bus stops on Ro ute
S-4 , with bus stops located approximately 0.20-0.25 miles apart. Stops are provided at key
activity centers and at connections with other local and regional bus routes to allow transfer
activity.
a e : tu IY au e T bl 11 S d R t 4 P ropose dB St us ops
Golden West Ave. (Terminal) Freer St.IEI Monte Ave. (after left turn)
Live Oak Ave./Golden West Ave. (after right Freer St./Halifax Rd. (nearside)
turn)
Live Oak Ave./Baldwin Ave. (nearside) Olive St./Arden Dr. (after left turn)
Bo~ue St./Baldwin Ave. (after left turn) Olive St./Baldwin Ave. (nearside)
Live Oak Park & Senior Center Olive St./Golden West Ave. (farside)
Live Oak Ave./Giickman Ave. (after right turn) Olive St./Temple City Blvd. (nearside)
Live Oak Ave./Hallowell Ave. (farside) Cloverly Ave./Olive St. (before ri~ht turn)
Li ve Oak Ave./EI Monte Ave. (farside) Cloverly Ave./Broadway (nearside)
Li ve Oak Ave./McCullough Ave. (nearside) Cloverly Ave./ Live Oak Ave. (nearside)
Santa Anita Ave./Live Oak Ave. (after right Cloverly Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (nearside)
turn)
Santa Anita Ave./Daines Dr. (nearside) Garibaldi Ave./Cloverly Ave. (after left turn)
Santa Anita Ave./Freer St. (farside) Oak Ave./Longden Ave. (nearside)
Santa Anita Ave./West Hondo Pk wy. Oak Ave./Lemon Ave. (farside)
(nearside)
4900 Santa Anita Ave. (Sam's Club) Camino Real Ave./Oak Ave. (after right turn)
Lo wer Azusa Rd./Santa Anita Ave . (after right Temple City Blvd./Lemon Ave. (nearside)
turn)
Lower Azusa Rd./Daleview Ave. (farside) Longden Ave./Temple City Ave. (after left turn)
Lower Azusa Rd./EI Monte Ave. (before right Longden Ave./Golden West Ave. (before right
turn) turn)
El Monte Ave./Grand Ave. (farside) Golden West Ave./Garibaldi Ave. (nearside)
Golden West Ave. (Terminal)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORT AT/ON SOLUTIONS Page 49
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
• S-5 ROUTE
Route S-5 provides service to the western and southwestern areas of Temple City. The route is
8.2 miles in length, and would operate in a clockwise direction starting on Golden West Avenue
and operating via the following route:
From Golden West Ave., then R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Cioverly Ave., L-Oiive St., A-Baldwin Ave., R-
Lower Azusa Rd., L-Encinita Ave., R-Mission Dr., R-Rosemead Blvd., L-Las Tunas Dr., A-
Muscatel Ave., R-Longden Ave., R-Oak Ave., L-Garibaldi Ave., A -Cloverly Ave., L-Las Tunas Dr.,
L-Kauffman Ave., R-Woodruff Ave., and R-Golden West Ave.
Route S-5 would provide service to a number of activity centers in the city, including City Hall , the
T emple City Library, T emple City Park, Ra lph 's Market, St. Luke 's Catholic Church and School ,
Cloverly Elementary School, Home Depot, Rosemead Park in the City of Rosemead, Rosemead
High School , shopping centers located at Las Tunas Dr. and Rosemead Blvd., the Temple City
Square Shopping Center and the Downtown Temple City shopping district. Ro ute S-5 wou ld also
provide bus service on a currently unserved segment of Lower Azusa Rd. west of Baldwin Ave.
Route S-5 wou ld also provide connections to several regional transit rout es for convenient travel
outside the city. Connecting transit routes include Metro L ines 78/378, 266, 267 and 489, and a
connection with the Rosemead Explorer in front of Rosemead High School
DIVERSIFIED TRA NSPORTATI ON SOLUTIONS Page so
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
Figure 16: Proposed Study Route 5
Study Route 5 and Activity Centers
-Local Govcmme.ftt e SltoppJ:nc Cettte.r
~ ,.._rll, e Scnlortenten . """"'
Prepared Junl! 2013 by Kam Reseom~h. for Diversified
~ !;;r:~vt~~f~=~u~:~:ponlltlonSolutlons,20l3 .
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 51
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
Proposed bus stops for Route S-5 are listed below. There are 36 proposed bus stops on Route
S-1, with bus stops located approximately 0.20-0.25 miles apart. Stops are provided at key
activity centers and at connections with other local and regional bus rou tes to allow transfer
activity.
a e . u y ou e ropose us ops . T bl 12 St d R t 5 P dB St
Golden West Ave. (Terminal) Rosemead Blvd./Lower Azusa Rd. (farside)
Las Tunas Dr.!Temple City Blvd. (farside) Rosemead Blvd./Pentland St. (farside)
Cloverly Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (after left turn) Rosemead Blvd./Serano Dr. (farside)
Cloverly Ave./Live Oak Ave. (farside) Rosemead Blvd./Broadway (farside)
Cloverly Ave./Broadway (nearside) Las Tunas Dr./Rosemead Blvd. (after right
turn)
Olive St./Cloverly Ave. (a fter left turn) Las Tunas Dr./Muscatel Ave. (before right
turn)
Olive St.!Temple City Blvd. (nearside) Muscatel Ave./Hermosa Ave. (nearside)
Olive St./Golden West Ave. (farside) Muscatel Ave./Garibaldi Ave. (nearside)
Baldwin Ave./Olive St. (after riQht turn) LonQden Ave./Muscatel Ave. (after right turn)
Baldwin Ave./La Rosa Dr. (farside) Longden Ave./ Rosemead Blvd. (farside)
Lower Azusa Rd./Baldwin Ave . (after right Longden Ave./Lorna Ave. (farside)
turn)
Lower Azusa Rd./ Golden West Ave. Oak Ave./Longden Ave. (after right turn)
(nearside)
Lower Azusa Rd.!Temf)le City Blvd. (farside) Garibaldi Ave./Oak Ave. (after left turn)
Lower Azusa Rd./Aiessandro Ave. (nearside) Las Tunas Dr./Cloverly Ave. (after left turn)
Encinita Ave./Lower Azusa Rd. (after left turn) Las Tunas Dr.!Temple City Blvd. (farside)
Mission Dr./Lower Azusa Rd. (after right turn) Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr. (after left turn)
Rosemead High School Kauffman Ave./Woodruff Ave. (before right
turn)
Rosemead Blvd./Mission Dr. (after right turn) Golden West Ave . (Terminal)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORT AT/ON SOLUTIONS Page 52
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS
Figure 17: Proposed Study Routes 4 and 5
Study Routes and Activity Centers
_,
e Local Gawmmcnt II Shopprc C."b!r
~ hrU e Senior Centeno e School
Prepl)(ed June 2013 by Kam Res nrth, ror DtvtrsJfied
Tr.msportiltion Solutbns
1------t----1 Source: Dlvcrsifred T~nsportatlon Solutions, 2013 .
lnrorm~tlon In this m.1p Is ftJrnl,h ed strlcttv as a convenience.
The City of Temple City doe5 not 01 ssume onv responsibilitY for
th@' accur<1cy of this map. j UNAUTHORIZED REPROOIJCTION,OISTRIBUTION, OR
• RETRANSMISSION Of THIS MAP IS STRICTlV PROHIS ITEO.
Page 53
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analysis
CONSTRAINED SERVICE PLAN-RESOURCE PLANNING
In developing the constrained service plan , the key operating assumptions indicated in the
strategic service plan were modified to reduce the operating cost of transit service . These revised
assumptions and their rationale for inclusion in the operating plan are listed below.
• The service frequency for Routes S-4 and S-5 is 60 minutes. In the constrained plan,
passengers would have a longer wait time for service than the strategic service plan.
Table 13 indicates the estimated running times and recovery time for each proposed
route.
• Service operation for each route would begin at 7:00a.m. on weekdays, with the last
trip arriving at the transit terminal at 8:00 p.m. On weekends, service would start at
8:00a.m., with the last trip ending at 6:00p.m . This span of service is consistent with
the strategic service plan scenario.
• Each route wou ld require the operation of 1 peak bus , for a total of 2 peak buses. One
additional bus would be included as a spare bus to maintain service reliability.
• The fare for each passenger trip is $0.50 . This fare reflects comments received from
residents in the community survey regarding the preferred rate of fare for local transit
service.
• The operating cost is estimated at $60 per hour of service.
• The estimated boardings are based on a rate of 20 boardings per service hour.
• SERVICE PERFORMANCE FOR CONSTRAINED SERVICE PLAN
Based on the operating plan parameters of the constrained service plan, the two alternative study
routes would provide a total of approximately 9,270 annual revenue hours of service between the
two routes with annual ridership estimated at 185,400 passengers. Table 14 highlights the
estimated operational performance of the constrained service scenario .
$46,350 $92,700
DIVERSIFIED TRA NSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 54
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
As shown in Table 14, the annual cost of operation in the constrained service plan scenario is
estimated at $556,200. This operating cost wo uld be offset by farebox revenue of $92,700, a
fare box recovery rate of 16. 7%. T he subsidy per boarding for the operation of Routes S-4 and S-
5 would be $2.50 per passenger boarding.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 55
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analysis
MULTI-PHASED SERVICE PLAN
MULTI-PHASED SERVICE PLAN-ROUTE NETWORK DESIGN
On July 24, 2013, the City's Parks and Recreation and Public Safety Commissions met jointly to
review the Strategic Plan and Constrained Plan operating alternatives, and to provide comments
and suggestions for transit service development. The recommendations of the commissioners
was to provide a service alternative for review that was similar to the previous two alternatives,
but that could be implemented in phases . Additionally, commissioners wanted to assess the
impact of various changes in operating assumptions from the earlier alternatives, including :
• Development of one baseline route
• Phased implementation of additional routes
• Service frequency of 30 minutes
• Bi-directional service operation
• Reroute proposed service from Rosemead Blvd. to Encinita Ave. or Sultana Ave.
• Relocate proposed bus staging area from Golden West Ave.
Based on these comments, a Multi-Phased Service Plan alternative was developed, with details
of the service plan provided below. A map of the phased service plan is provided in Figure 18.
• PHASES I AND II (BASELINE ROUTE)
The baseline route of the multi-phased service plan would provide service to several major activity
centers within the core areas of Temple City. The route is 4.9 miles in length , and would operate
bi-directionally via the following route:
Clockwise:
From Golden West Ave., then L-Uve Oak Ave., R-Baldwin Ave., L-Bogue St., L-Giickman Ave.,
R-Live Oak Ave., R-Gracewood Ave., L-Daines Dr., R-Arden Dr., R-0/ive St., R-Cioverly Ave.,
L-Broadway, R-Rosemead Blvd., R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Kauffman Ave., R-Woodruff Ave., and R-
Golden West Ave.
Counter-Clockwise:
From Golden West Ave., then R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Rosemead Blvd., L-Broadway, R-C/overly Ave.,
L-0/ive St., L-Arden Dr., L-Daines Dr., R-Gracewood Ave., L-Live Oak Ave., L-G/ickman Ave., R-
Bogue St., R-Baldwin Ave., L-Live Oak Ave., R-Golden West Ave., L-Las Tunas Dr., R-Kauffman
Ave., R-Woodruff Ave., and R-Golden West Ave.
The baseline route would provide service to a number of key activity centers in the city, including
City Hall, the Temple City Library, Temple City Park, Live Oak Park and Senior Center, St. Luke's
Catholic Church and School, Cloverly Elementary School, shopping centers located at Las Tunas
Dr. and Rosemead Blvd., Ralph 's Market and the Downtown Temple City shopping district.
The baseline route would p rovide connections to several regional transit routes for convenient
travel outside the city. Connecting transit routes include Metro Lines 78/378, 266 , 267, 268, and
489.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 56
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
In this alternative, the baseline route wou ld be implemented in two phases. The first phase would
be operatio n of service on weekdays only, with a second phase being the addition of transit
service on weekends. The route of this baseline service would remain the same on weekdays
and weekends.
DIVERS IFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 57
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternati ves Analysis
Figure 18: Multi-Phased Route Network
All Phases w ith Activity Centers
-•v •••••••• v
e !.Deal Gcwtmm•nt e Shopphtc t:Mtw
,6. I'Vb • .sno .. c-...
• S<hool
Prepared September 2013 by Kam Rl!~arch, for OivrrsifK'd
Tr.lnspottation Solut ions
Source: Diverslfted Tl'3nsportaUon Solutlora, 2013.
I I 1 -~Information In th t~ m1.1p Is fumlJhll!d .strictly n~ a convenience .
IU-\-+---1-,1--T--'-rt-l'he ctty of Temple City does not ;usume any responstblhty for \ ---_c theaccur.~cyofthls.mep .
1--------t--UNA UT HORIZED REPRODUCTIDN ,OIITRIBUTIDN, OR
· -RETRANSMISSION OF THIS MAP IS STRICTlY PROHIBITED.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 58
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
Proposed bus stops for the baseline route are li sted below. There are 24 proposed bus stops in
each direction on the baseline route, with bus stops located approximately 0.20-0.25 miles apart.
Stops are provided at key activity centers and at connections with other local and regional bus
routes to allow transfer activity.
T bl a e 15: Ph ases an diiP ropose dB S us tops
Golden West Ave. (Terminal) Broadway/Cloverly Ave.
Live Oak Ave./Golden West Ave. Broadway/Encinita Ave .
Live Oak Ave./Ba ld win Ave. Rosemead Blvd./Broadway
Bogue St./Baldwin Ave. Rosemead Blvd./Las Tunas Dr.
Live Oak Park & Senior Center Las Tunas Dr./Sultana Ave.
Live Oak Ave./Giickman Ave. Las Tunas Dr./Loma Ave.
Daines Dr./Gracewood Ave. Las Tunas Dr./Encinita Ave.
Olive St./Arden Dr. Las Tunas Dr./Oak Ave.
Olive St./Baldwin Ave. Las Tunas Dr./Temple C ity Blvd.
Olive St./Golden West Ave. Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr.
Olive St./Temple C ity Blvd. Kauffman Ave./Woodruff Ave.
Cloverly Ave./Olive St. Golden West Ave. (Terminal)
• PHASE /II
Phase Il l of the multi -phased plan would implement the routing described previously for Study
Line S-1 . The route is 5.6 miles in length , and wou ld operate bi-directional ly starting on Golden
West Avenue and operating via the following route:
Clockwise:
From Golden West Ave., then R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Encinita Ave., A-Broadway, A-Rosemead Blvd.,
L-Las Tunas Dr., A-Muscatel Ave., R-Longden Ave., L-Oak Ave., R-Camino Real Ave., R-Temple
City Blvd., L-Longden Ave., and R-Golden West Ave.
Counter-Clockwise:
From Golden West Ave., then R-Las Tunas Dr., A-Kauffman Ave., A -Woodruff Ave., L-Golden
West Ave., L-Longden Ave., R-Temple City Blvd., L-Camino Real Ave., L-Oak Ave., R-Longden
Ave., L-Muscatel Ave., L-Las Tunas Dr., A-Rosemead Blvd., L-Broadway, L-Encinita Ave., R-Las
Tunas Dr., L-Kauffman Ave., A-Woodruff Ave., and R -G olden West Ave.
The Phase Ill route wou ld provide service to a number of activity centers in the city, including City
Hall, the Temple City Library, Temple City Park, Temple City High School , Oak Avenue
Intermediate School , Temple City Square Shopping Center, shopping centers located at Las
Tunas Dr. and Rosemead Blvd., and the Downtown Temple City shopping district.
The Phase Ill route wou ld also provide connections to several regional transit routes for
convenient travel outside the city. Connecting transit routes include Metro Lin es 78/378, 266 , 267
and 489.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 59
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
Proposed bus stops for th e Phase Il l route are list ed below. There are 26 proposed bus stops on
the route , wi th bus stops located appro ximately 0.20-0.25 miles apart. Stops are provided at key
activity centers and at connections w ith other local and regional bus routes to allow transfer
activity.
Table 16: Phase Ill Route Proposed Bus Stops
Golden West Ave. (Terminal) Muscatel Ave./Garibaldi Ave .
Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr. Muscatel Ave./Hermosa Ave.
Kauffman Ave./Woodruff Ave. Las Tunas Dr./Muscatel Ave.
Golden West Ave./Garibaldi Ave. Rosemead Blvd./Las T unas Dr.
Lonqden Ave./Golden West Ave. Broadway/Rosemead Blvd .
Longden Ave./Temple City Blvd. Encinita Ave./Broadway
Temple City Blvd./Lemon Ave. Encinita Ave./Live Oak Ave.
Camino Real Ave.!TemJ)Ie City Blvd. Encinita Ave./Las Tunas Dr.
Oak Ave./Camino Real Ave. Las Tun as Dr./Oak Ave.
Oak Ave./Lemon Ave. Las Tunas Dr./Temple City Blvd.
Lonqden Ave./Oak Ave. Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr.
Longden Ave./Rosemead Blvd. Kauffman Ave./Woodruff Ave.
Muscatel Ave./Longden Ave. Golden West Ave. (Terminal)
• PHASE IV
Phase IV of the multi-phased plan implements a routing similar to the routing described previously
for Study Line S-2. This phase of the routing plan would provide service to the southern and
southwest areas of Temple City. The route is 7.3 miles in length , and wou ld operate bi-
directionally starting on Golden West Avenue and operating via the following route:
Clockwise:
From Golden West Ave., then R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Cioverly Ave., L-0/ive St., R-Baldwin Ave., R-
Lower Azusa Rd., L-Encinita Ave., R-Mission Dr., R-Rosemead Blvd., R-Lower Azusa Rd., L-
Encinita Ave., L-Broadway, R-Rosemead Blvd., R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Kauffman Ave., R-Woodruff
Ave., and R-Golden West Ave.
Counter -Clockwise:
From Golden West Ave., then R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Rosemead Blvd., L-Broadway, R-Encinita Ave.,
R-Lower Azusa Rd., L-Rosemead Blvd., L-Mission Dr., L-Encinita Ave., R-Lower Azusa Rd., L-
Baldwin Ave., L-Oiive St., R-Cioverly Ave., R-Las Tunas Dr., L-Kauffman Ave., R-Woodruff Ave.,
and R-Golden West Ave.
The Phase IV route would provide service to a number of activity cen ters in the city , including City
Hall, the Temple City Library, Temple City Park, Ralph 's Market, St. Luke 's Catholic Church and
School, Cloverly Elementary School, Home Depot, Rosemead Park in the City of Rosemead,
Rosemead High School, shopping centers located at Las Tunas Dr. and Rosemead Blvd., and
the Downtown Temple City shopping district. The Phase IV routing would also provide bus service
on a currently unserved segment of Lower Azusa Rd. west of Baldwin Ave., and along Encinita
Ave. between Lo wer Azusa Rd. and Broadway.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Pag e 60
Temp le City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
The Phase IV route would also provide connections to several regional transit routes for
convenient travel outside the city. Connecting transit routes include Metro Lines 78/378, 266 , 267,
268 and 489, and a connection with the Rosemead Explorer in front of Rosemead High School.
Proposed bus stops for the Phase IV route are listed below. There are 32 proposed bus stops on
this route, with bus stops located approximately 0.20-0.25 miles apart. Stops are provided at key
activity centers and at connections with other local and r eg ion al bus routes to allow transfe r
activity.
Tab e 17: Ph ase IVR oute p ropose dB S us tops
Golden West Ave. (Terminal) Rosemead High School
Las Tunas Dr./Temple City Blvd. Rosemead Blvd./Mission Dr.
Cloverly Ave./Las Tunas Dr. Encinita Ave./Lower Azusa Rd.
Cloverly Ave./Live Oak Ave. Encinita Ave./Serano Dr.
Cloverly Ave./Broadway En c inita Ave./Pentland St.
Olive St./Cloverly Ave. Broadway/E ncinita Ave.
Olive St./Temple City Blvd. Rosemead Blvd./Broadway
Olive St./Golden West Ave . Rosemead Blvd./Las Tunas Dr.
Baldwin Ave./Olive St. Las Tunas Dr./Sultana Ave.
Baldwin Ave./La Rosa Dr. Las Tunas Dr./Lama Ave.
Lower Azusa Rd./Baldwin Ave. Las Tunas Dr./Encinita Ave.
Lower Azusa Rd./ Golden West Ave. Las Tunas Dr./Oak Ave.
Lower Azusa Rd./Temple City Blvd. Las Tunas Dr./Temple City Blvd .
Lower Azusa Rd./Aiessandro Ave. Kauffman Ave./Las Tunas Dr.
Encinita Ave./Lower Azusa Rd. (after left turn) Kauffma n Ave./Woodruff Ave.
Mission Dr./Lower Azusa Rd. (after right turn) Golden West Ave . (Terminal)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 61
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
• PHASE V
Phase V of the multi-phased plan would add an extension to the baseline route that would extend
transit service to the eastern and southeastern areas of Te mple City. The route extension would
add an additional 3.5 miles to the baseline route, and would operate bi-directionally from Live Oak
Ave. at Gracewood Ave. and operate via the following route:
Clockwise:
From Live Oak Ave. at Gracewood Ave., then via Live Oak Ave., R-Santa Anita Ave., R-Lower
Azusa Rd., R-EI Monte Ave., L-Freer St., R-Arden Dr., L-0/ive St., then via original proposed
baseline service routing.
Counter-Clockwise:
From Olive St. at Arden Dr., then via R-Arden Dr., L-Freer St., R-EI Monte Ave., L-Lower Azusa
Rd., L-Santa Anita Ave., L-Live Oak Ave., L-Gracewood Ave., then via original proposed baseline
service routing.
In the Phase V extension phase , transit service operating along Gracewood Ave., Daines Dr. and
Arden Dr. north of Olive St. provided by the baseline route would be discontinued.
The extension of the baseline route in Phase V would extend transit service to a number of
additional activity centers in the city , including the CVS store located at Live Oak Ave. and El
Monte Ave., Arroyo High School, and Sam's Club.
The extension of the baseline route in Phase V would also provide connections to several regional
transit routes in the eastern section of the city including Metro Line 487, Foothill Transit Line 492,
and a connection with the El Monte T ransportation Red Route at Santa Anita Ave. and Lower
Azusa Rd.
Proposed bus stops for the Phase V extension are listed below. There would be 14 bus stops
added to the baseline route in Phase V, with bus stops located approximately 0.20-0.25 miles
apart. Stops are provided at key activity centers and at connections with other local and regional
bus routes to allow transfer activity.
a e . T bl 18 Ph ase V R t P ou e dB St us ropose ops
Live Oak Ave./Hallowell Ave. 4900 Santa Anita Ave. (Sam's Club)
Live Oak Ave./EI Monte Ave. Lower Azusa Rd./Santa Anita Ave.
Live Oak Ave./McCullough Ave. Lower Azusa Rd./Daleview Ave.
Santa Anita Ave./Live Oak Ave. Lower Azusa Rd./EI Monte Ave.
Santa Anita Ave./Daines Dr. El Monte Ave./Grand Ave.
Santa Anita Ave./Freer St. Freer St./EI Monte Ave.
Santa Anita Ave./West Hondo Pkwy. Freer St./Halifax Rd .
DIVERSIFIED TRANSP OR TATION SOLUTIONS Page 62
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analysis
MULTI-PHASED SERVICE PLAN -RESOURCE PLANNING
In developing the multi -phased service plan, several key assumptions were included in the
parameters of the operating plan. These assumptions and the rationale associated with their
inclusion in the operating plan are listed below.
• The service frequency for each route implemented in the multi-phase plan is 30
minutes in each direction. Table 19 indicates the estimated running times and
recovery time for each proposed route .
Table 1 9: Estimated Running Times for Multi-Phased Service Plan
· .. ·.·. · ~o.u~e :~ ·· · · _EstR.~.n~nir;"~g · R.ecovery :Tini'e ·:· ·,.T~ta~~Trilf!~w.~·~~
· ' · -· Time '(min:) · (min.) · · ana ·.Recover~."-1 ~· ~·~· ~· '~· __ , ___ ~_· --~·--~~· ~· _· -~-~---· _· __ : -~~jln.in:··· C" ~· j
Phases I and II 25 5 30
Phase Ill 28 32 60
Phase IV 37 23 60
Phase V 43 17 60 (with baseline route)
• Service operation for each route would begin at 7:00a.m. on weekdays , with the last
trip arriving at the transit terminal at 8:00 p.m. On weekends , service would start at
8:00 a.m., with the last trip ending at 6:00 p.m. This span of service is consistent
earlier service plan scenarios.
• With the operation of 30 minute service frequency in both directions of service, the
Phase I and II baseline route would require the operation of 2 peak buses, and the
Phase Ill and IV routes require 4 peak buses. T he Phase V extension would add 2
additional peak buses to the baseline route, for a total of 12 peak buses at full
implementation. Three additional bus would be included as spare buses to maintain
service reliability.
• The fare for each passenger trip is $0.50. This fare reflects comments received from
residents in the community survey regarding the preferred rate of fare for local transit
service.
• The operating cost is estimated at $60 per hour of service.
• The estimated boardings are based on a rate of 15 boardings per service hour from
Phases I through Ill , and 20 boardings per hour as the route network grows in Phases
IV and V.
• SERVICE PERFORMANCE FOR MULTI-PHASED SERVICE PLAN
Based on the operating plan parameters of the multi-phased service plan, the full implementation
of the phased plan would provide a total of approximately 55 ,620 annual revenue hours of service
with annual ridership estimated at 1,019,700 passengers. Table 20 highlights the estimated
operational performance of the multi-phased service scenario.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 63
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Anal ysis
Table 20: Estimated Service Performance for Multi-Phased Plan
• • , ·. ~ ~ •. ~< •• · • F!hase ·l .. ~tiase II . _. ,Phase m· · Phase IV · Phase V Totals ,.~,
~ ~:..~... ___ ----------~----------- ---~--
Ann. Rev. 6,630.0 2,640.0 18,540.0 18,540.0 9,270.0 55,620.0 Hrs.
Ann. Rev. 64,974.0 25,872.0 103,824.0 135,342.0 64,890.0 394,902.0 Miles
Peak 2 2 4 4 2 14 Vehicles
Ann. 99,450 39,600 278,100 370,800 231,750 1,019,700 Boardings
Est. Ann.
Operating $397,800 $158,400 $1,112,400 $1 '112,400 $556,200 $3,337,200
Cost
Est. Ann.
Farebox
Rev. $49,725 $19,800 $139,050 $185,400 $115,875 $509,850
(est. avg.
fare $0.50)
Farebox 12.5% 12.5% 12.5% 16.7% 20.8% 15.3% Recovery
Subsidy Per $3.50 $3 .50 $3.50 $2.50 $1 .90 $2.77 Boarding
Note -Phase V route extens1on f1gures added to Phases I and II
As shown in Table 20, the annual cost of operation in the multi-phased service plan scenario is
estimated at $3,337,200. This operating cost would be offset by farebox revenue of $509,850, a
farebox recovery rate of 15.3%. The subsidy per boarding for the operation of the multi-phased
plan would be $2.77 per passenger boarding.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 64
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
RECOMMENDED SERVICE PLAN
RECOMMENDED SERVICE PLAN-ROUTE NETWORK DESIGN
Given the operating costs of each the service plan scenarios outlined above, and the funding
available to the city for transportation services, it is recommended that city implement only the
baseline route described in the multi-phased plan. The baseline route would provide service on
both weekdays and weekends, and would operate in a clockwise direction using one peak bus
(plus one spare bus).
Implementation of the Recommended Service Plan alternative allows for the initial operation of a
baseline transit route serving Downtown Temple City and several key activity centers and
neighborhoods surrounding the downtown area. This alternative provides the opportunity to
evaluate the productivity of transit service in a cost-effective manner, and allows for future
expansion of the transit network as funding allows.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 65
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternati ves Ana l ysis
Figure 19: Recommended Baseline Route
Phases I a nd II w i th Activity Centers
...... ,.,. ........ ...._......,
,A ,..... • .....,c.ru n ........
Pre p.ired Sep(l!mb.tr lOU bv !Cam Research, for Dlvel'$rfl~
. lhlruportaUon Sofudum r------r---1 Sou rce: Diver..! n ed Tr.~nspo~tJon SolurJons. 2013.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Pag e 66
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
RECOMMENDED SERVICE PLAN-RESOURCE PLANNING
Key operating assumptions of th e baseline plan and their rationale for inclusion in the operating
plan are outlined below.
• The service frequency for the baseline route is 30 minutes. Table 21 indicates the
estimated running times and recovery time for each proposed route.
Table 21: Estimated Running Times f or the Base line Route
30
• Service operation for each route would begin at 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, with the last
trip arriving at the transit terminal at 8:00 p.m. On weekends, service would start at
8:00a.m., with the last trip ending at 6:00p.m.
• The baseline route would require the operation of 1 peak bus, with one additional bus
included as a spare bus to maintain service reliability.
• The fare for each passenger trip is $0.50. This fare reflects comments received from
residents in the community survey regarding the preferred rate of fare for local transit
service.
• The operating cost is estimated at $60 per hour of service.
• The estimated boardings are based on a rate of 15 boardings per service hour.
• SERVICE PERFORMANCE FOR RECOMMENDED SERVICE PLAN
Based on the operating plan parameters of the baseline routing, this route would provide a total
of approximately 4,635 annual revenue hours of service with annual ridership estimated at 69,525
passengers. Table 22 highlights the estimated operational performance of the constrained service
scenario .
Table 22: Estimated Service Performance for Baseline Route .. . ___ -~--~~:{Totals ·~·.'
Ann. Rev. Hrs. 4,635.0
Ann. Rev. Miles 45,423.0
Peak Vehicles 1
Ann. Boardings 69,525
Est Ann. Operating Cost $278,100
Est Ann. Farebox Rev. $34,800 (est. avq. fare $0.50)
Farebox Recovery 12.5%
Subsidy Per Boarding $3.50
As shown in Table 22, the annual cost of operation for the baseline route is estimated at $278,100.
This operating cost would be offset by farebox revenue of $34,800, a farebox recovery rate of
12.5%. The subsidy per boarding for the operation of the baseline route would be $3.50 per
passenger boarding.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 67
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Alternatives Analvsis
STAGING AREA
T o provide a location for buses to park at the end of each trip, the original assessment of the
consulting team recommended the staging of buses along Golden West Ave. north of Las Tunas
Dr., adjacent to Temple City Park . The use of this location would achieve several goals:
• The facilitation of passenger transfers between routes
• Proximity to the Temple City Civic Center area
• Proximity to restroom facilities for bus operators
• A short distance to the connection with Metro Lines 78/378
After the review of this recommendation by the City's Parks and Recreation and Public Safety
Commissions and city staff, concerns were raised regarding impacts to residents on the east side
of Golden West Ave . After additional review, and considering the recommendation to implement
the baseline route as the preferred routing , the recommended bus staging location was moved to
Live Oak Park on Bogue St. T his location would provide direct interface for passengers w ith the
park and Senior Center, and based on the routing of the baseline route, it would maintain the
features of the previous staging location listed above.
VEHICLES
Fo r th e procurement of vehicles to be used in operation of the recommended service plan, an
assessment should be made regarding the type of buses that would be most effective in providing
transit service , and the preferred method to acquire buses, either through leasing or purchase.
Given the estimated range of ridership on the transit system at 15-20 boardings per hour, the use
of smaller 30-foot buses with seating capacities of approximately 30 passengers (or 23
passengers and 2 wheelchair securement spaces) wo uld provide sufficient capacity for daily
service operation. In the review of transit service options , city staff has also indicated an interest
in the operation of trolley-style transit vehicles that could provide a historic look to transit service
while also operating in a cost-efficient manner. Trolley vehicles could also provide sufficient
seating capacity as long as these vehicles provide that capability to board wheelchair passengers.
Figure 20 displays an example trolley-style bus operated by the Los Angeles Department of
Transportation (LADOT) on one of their DASH routes.
Figure 20: Trolley-Style Transit Bus Operated by LADOT
DIV£RSIFI£D TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Pa ge 68
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
In considering the preferred manner to procure vehicles, usually it is less economical to lease
equipment than to purchase it. Ho wever , there are some instances where leasing is preferable
to vehicle purchase. For example, short-term leases of a vehicle w hich is required for a short
tim e or for a uniqu e task may be reasonable and economically sound. But longer term leases
and leases for items that should be purchased and capitalized but cannot be because of budget
constraints are not economically prudent.
Several factors should be considered in deciding whether bus leasing or purchasing buses are
the most appropriate. These factors include the following:
• Estimated length of the period th e equipment is required and the amo unt of time of
actual equipment usage
• Technological obsolescence of the equipment
• Financial and operating advantages of alternative types and makes of equipment
• Total leasing cost for the estimated period of use
• Net purchase price, if acquired by purchase
• Maintenance, storage and other service costs
• Trade-in or salvage value
• Imputed interest costs
• Availability of a servicing facility especially for highly complex equipment (i.e., can the
agency service the equipment if it is purchased)
The following analysis was performed to compare the financial impacts of bus leasing and bus
purchase options. The analysis considered the following factors:
• Vehicle Specifications
o 2014 El Dorado National Aero Elite Ford 550 Cutaway
o 2014 Ford F550 6.8 Liter V1 0 (Medium Duty) Engine
o CNG Upfit and OVM Certified
o 29 passenger seating capacity or 23 passenger seating capacity and 2
wheelchair securement spaces
• Lease Option
o Lease rate: $2,700 per month (includes tax, license , DMV and documentation
fees)
o Annual lease cost for two (2) buses: $64,800
o Two-year lease cost: $128,000
• Purchase Option
o Purchase Price: $134,100
o Purchase Price for two (2) buses: $268,216
o Expected Life based on annual 35,000 miles: 8 year (280,000 mileage)
o Depreciation cost per year based on two (2) buses: $33,600
o Two-year depreciation cost based on 2 vehicles: $67,100 (potential resale
$201 ,000)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 69
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Alternatives Analysis
Based on the cost factors associated with leasing versus purchase of buses, if the City of Temple
City were to acquire two buses for the operation of the baseline route as an initial phase of transit
service, the following recommendations are provided by the consulting team:
• If the City desired to implement transit service and assess the level of service
performance for a period of time (i .e., a 1-2 year period) before committing to longer-
term service operation, leasing of buses would be preferable. This provides the City
an opportunity to operate transit service with a lower capital cost outlay before funding
the purchase of long-term assets.
• If the City planned to commit to longer-term fixed-route transit service operation, or
planned to use purchased vehicles for other transportation uses such as dial-a-ride
service, then the purchase of buses would be preferable. This is due to the longer
term costs disadvantages of leasing, and the potential value derived from resale of the
vehicles if desired.
If buses are purchased, potential sources of funding include Proposition A funds, Proposition C
funds, and AB2766 funding (air quality management funding). Competitive grant funding may
also be available from several sources:
• 2015 Call for Projects
• MSRC 50/50 Funding
• MSRC Clean Fuel Funding
• FTA 5310 Funding
• Prop A Incentives
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 70
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Funding Opportunities
FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
This chapter provides an overview of the various federal , state, and regional transit funding
sources that the City of Temple City may use to implement its local transit system. Funding is
either programmed annually on a formula basis or as competitive grants. T he planning of Temple
City's local transit system should include a clear understanding of each funding program 's
requirements in ord er to be abl e to leve rag e limited local recourses to implement the propos ed
transit system.
FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES
• MAP-21
MAP-21 , the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act was signed into law by President
Obama on July 6, 2012. MAP-21 is the first long-term transportation authorization act since the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient T ransportation Equity Action: A Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA-LU) Act of 2005 , and programs over $105 billion fo r Fiscal Years 2013 and 2014.
MAP-21 creates a streamlined performance-based surface transportation program that builds on
many highway, transit , bike, and pedestrian programs and policies first established in 1991 with
the authorization of the lntermodal Transportation Efficiency Action (ISTEA).
MAP-21 is a performance-based program that requires states to invest resources in projects that
achieve individual targets that collectively will help accomplish national goals . MAP-21 's national
performance directly related to bicycle and non-motorized transportation include:
o System Reliability-To improve the efficiency of the surface transportation system
o Environmental Sustainability -To enhance the performance of the transportation
system while protecting and enhancing the natural environment
The individual surface transportation programs contained in MAP-21 are summarized below.
o Surface Transportation Program (STP) -The STP program provides an average of
$10 billion per year in flex ible funding that can be used by state and local governments
for projects that preserve or improve conditions and performance on any Federal-aid
highway, bridge projects on any public road, facilities for non-motorized transportation,
transit capital projects, and bus terminal and facilities.
o Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)-MAP-21 provides an average of $2.4
billion per year for projects that demonstrate a quantifiable improvement to safety on
all public roadways and involving different travel modes including non-motorized
transportation. Each state is responsible for identifying key safety problems, establish
their relative severity, and adopt strategic performance-based goals to maximize
safety. Funds are allocated based on how the individual projects achieve these goals.
o Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvements Program (CMAQ) -The
CMAQ program provides an average of $3.3 billion per year to state and local
governments for transportation projects and programs that help meet the requirements
of the Clean Air Act. Funding is available to reduce congestion and improve air quality
for areas that do not meet the National Air Quality Standards for ozone, carbon
monoxide, or matriculate matter (nonattainment areas) as well as for former
DIV£RS IFI£D TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 71
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Funding Opportunities
nonattainment areas that are now in compliance. Projects that reduce or replace
automobile travel with non-motorized transportation (walking or bicycling) are key
components of this program.
o Transportation Alternatives (T A) -The Transportation Alternative program provides
funding for a variety of alternative transportation projects that were previously funded
through different federal funding programs. This program is funded at a level equal to
two percent of the authorized Federal-aid highway and highway research funds.
States must use a specific portion of their T A fund allocations for recreational trail
projects. Other eligible uses include transportation alternatives (i.e . bicycle,
pedestrian, streetscape projects) and Safe Routes to School programs.
• SECTION 5307 URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT GRANTS
This program provides grants to urbanized areas (UZA's) for public transportation capital
investments including pavement maintenance and other bus and/or rail capital uses. The funds
are allocated by formula based on population, population density, and level of transit service.
Recipients are required to spend one percent of each apportionment for transit enhancement
uses. Metro administers Section 5307 funds for Los Angeles County. It allocates 15 percent of
the County's Section 5307 funds for discretionary uses and 85 percent by formula to itself and
other transit operators within the county.
• SECTION 5308 CLEAN FUEL GRANTS PROGRAM
This program provides funding on a discretionary basis for clean-air fuel buses and related
facilities within air-quality non-attainment and maintenance areas. Eligible expenses include
purchase or lease of clean-air fuel buses; construction of clean-fuel buses, electrical recharging
facilities and related equipment, and public transportation facilities to accommodate clean-fuel
buses.
• SECTION 5309 BUS AND BUS FACILITY GRANTS
This program provides funding for fleet or service expansion including bus-related facilities such
as maintenance and transfer facilities, terminals, the intercity portion of an intermodal facility,
computers, garage equipment, bus rebuilds, and passenger shelters.
• SECTION 5309 VERY SMALL STARTS ACCOUNT
This discretionary grant program is a component of the New Starts Program. It provides funding
for simple, low-risk public transportation capital projects. Bus, rail, or ferry projects must contain
the following features in order to qualify for this program: signal priority/pre-emption (for bus/Light
Rail Transit), low-floor boarding vehicles, special branding of. service, frequent service (1 0 minutes
peak, 15 minutes off-peak), minimum 14 service hours per day, minimum 3,000/day current
ridership, less than $50 million total project cost, or $3 million per mile (excluding vehicles).
DIV£RSIFI£D TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 72
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Studv Funding Opportunities
• SECTION 5310 ELDERLY PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
This program provides funding to cover the capital costs related to providing transportation
services to the elderly or persons wit h disabilities. Eligible expenses include acquisition of
accessible vans and buses, and communication equipment. Projects must be included in a local
coordinated public transit/human services plan. Eligible agencies to receive funds in c lude private
non-profit agencies, public agencies approved by the State to coordinate services for the elderly
or persons with disabilities, or public agencies that certify to the State that no non-profit
organizations or associations are readily available in an area to provide these services.
STATE FUNDING SOURCES
• ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION
State program established in 1989 to fund projects that mitigate negative environmental impacts
built or modified after 1989. These mitigations must be any r eq uired mitigations identified as part
of a project's environmental review process.
• PROPOSITION 1B-STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BOND
T he voter-approved Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality and Port Security Bond Act of
2006 authorizes $19.925 billion of general obligation bonds to be used to fund projects through out
th e state that apply to 17 specified categories including Transit System Safety, Security, and
Disaster Response; and Local Street and Road, Congestion Relief, and Traffic Safety. Each
category's funds are allocated either on a formula or discretionary basis, and each category has
specific funding formulas or guidelines. Funding categories must be included in the State's annual
budget.
LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES
• PROPOSITION A
Proposition A is a %-cent sales tax increase approved by Los Angeles County voters in 1980.
The funds are used to improve public transit throughout Los Angeles County both at local and
regional levels. Proposition A is administered by Metro wh ich allocates the funds based on Metro
Board-approved formulas.
• PROPOSITION A LOCAL RETURN PROGRAM
The Proposition A Local Return program provides funding to cities and the County of Los Angeles
for local transit programs including fixed-route and paratransit services, Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) and transit fare subsidy programs. Cities are allowed to trade Proposition A
Local Return funds to other jurisdictions for general or other funds provided that the funds are
used for public transit purposes. Cities may also establish a capital reserve with Metro Board
approval.
Metro allocates these funds annually to cities on a per-capita basis. Cities are required to prepare
annual budgets and project descriptions that are reviewed and approved by Metro, and Metro
conducts annual compliance audits to assure that the local agencies are using the funding in
accordance to program guidelines.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 73
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Studv Funding Opportunities
• PROPOSITION A 40% DISCRETIONARY FUNDS
Metro Board policy requires that 95 percent of Proposition A Discretionary funds be used to fund
bus operations within Los Angeles County based on a Metro-approved allocation formula. The
remaining five percent (Proposition A Incentive Funds) are used to fund sub-regional paratransit
programs, special transit programs, and voluntary National Transit Database (NTD) reporting.
• PROPOSITION C
Proposition A is a %-cent sales tax increase approved by Los Angeles County voters in 1990.
T he funds are used to improve public transit throughout Los Angeles County both at local and
regional levels . Proposition C is administered by Metro wh ich allocates the funds based on a
Board-approved formula , through the Metro Call for Projects, Metro Board allocations.
• PROPOSITION C LOCAL RETURN
The Proposition C Local Return program provides funding to cities and the County of Los Angeles
for local transit programs including fixed-route and paratransit services, Transportation Demand
Management (TOM), Transportation System Management (TSM), transit fare subsidy programs,
Congestion Management Programs (CMP), bicycle paths and lanes that support bicycle
commuting, transit-supporting street improvement projects, and Pavement Management System
projects. Cities may establish a capital reserve with Metro Board approval, but may not trade
Proposition C Local Return funds with other jurisdictions.
Metro allocates these funds annually to cities on a per-capita basis. Cities are required to prepare
annual budgets and project descriptions that are reviewed and approved by Metro, and Metro
conducts annual compliance audits to assure that the local agencies are using the funding in
accordance to program guidelines.
• MEASURER
Measure R is a Y2-cent sales tax increase approved by Los Angeles County voters in 2008. It
funds public transit improvements within Los Angeles County for a period of 30 years beginning
July 1, 2009. Eligible uses include local street improvements, traffic reduction, rail expansion,
and projects that improve public transportation and quality of life.
• MEASURER LOCAL RETURN
The Measure R Local Return program provides funding to cities and the County of Los Angeles
for local transportation projects including major street resurfacing , rehabilitation , and
reconstruction; pothole repairs; traffic signal improvements (left turn signals, synchronization,
etc.); bikeways; pedestrian improvements; and transit.
Metro allocates these funds annually to cities on a per-capita basis. Cities are required to prepare
annual budgets and project descriptions that are reviewed and approved by Metro, and Metro
conducts annual compliance audits to assure that the local agencies are using the funding in
accordance to program guidelines.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 74
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Funding Opportunities
• AB 2766 PROGRAM-AIR QUALITY VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE
The annual $6 vehicle registration surcharge within the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (AQMD) is used to fund air quality efforts as per AB 2766. A total of 40 percent of these
funds are allocated annually to cities and counties on a per-capita basis for projects that reduce
motor vehicle air pollution. Thirty percent of these funds are allocated to specific projects on a
competitive basis, and based on recommendations made by the SCAQMD 's Mobile Air Po llution
Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) and Board of Directors.
• TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT, ARTICLE 3 {TDA-3) FUNDS
TDA-3 provides cities annual funding for pedestrian and bicycle projects. Projects that improve
pedestrian and bicycle access to transit facilities is an eligible use of these funds. Metro allocates
these funds to cities and the County of Los Angeles on a per-capita basis. Cities must either draw
down each year's allocation or request that Metro place the allocation on reserve. Cities may
accumulate up to five years of allocations. Any funds that have been drawn down and have not
been fully spend during the year of allocation, or that have been held in reserve for more than five
years are subject to lapse per Metro policies.
Table 23 identifies FY 2014 Local Return estimates for Temple City.
Table 23: FY 2014 Local Return Funds Estimates
Popul.atio~· ·. · ~ ;
-Estirytat~~· ·. •, ::;:
~----------" -
Los An!=)eles County 9,958,091
Temple City 35,952
%County Total 0.361%
*State of Ca/lforma Department of Fmance, 2012
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 75
,. -
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Study Funding Opportunities
(This page intentionally left blank)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 76
T em pie City Fixed Route Transit Study Marketing Strategies
MARKETING STRATEGIES
A local transit system's ultimate success depends on how will it meets the mobility needs of its
users, and influence the travel behavior of potential future users. Negative perceptions of public
transit such as it being unsafe or inconvenient also need to be addressed in order for th e transit
system to be considered a viable alternative to automobile travel. Marketing plans provide a
strategic approach to ad dressi ng these issues by identifying goals, target mark ets, and
developing strategies for en hancing a transit system's image and ridership .
Information sources used to develop a transit system's marketing plan include , but are not lim ited
to :
• Local transit plans and system analysis reports
• Existing ridership information and data
• Existing marketing material s
• Transit agency staff
• Census data
• Interviews of stakeholders representing local social service agencies, advocacy
groups, businesses, and educational in stitutions
• Focus groups consisting of existing transit riders and potential future riders
• Evaluation of passenger experience gained from using different local and regional
transit services and systems
• Visits to existing trans it centers
• GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
A marketing plan sh ould have a clearly defined goal and objectives that will be used t o address
specific objectives. The goals and objectives should be developed by city staff in conjunction with
local stakeholders. Goals and objectives may include :
• Building awareness among Temple City's residents for the entire range of
transportation services that the city provides
• Improve the ease of understanding for using transit in Temple City
• Improve the customer experience of current transit users
• Conduct targeted marketing efforts to build r iders hip among market segments with the
greatest potential to benefit from tran sit use
• TARGET MARKETS
Transit systems are typically used by diverse user groups. The ability to identify and understand
the needs of these market segments is a critical component of a successful marketing plan. W hile
all transit systems serve unique markets, user groups typically include:
• Commuters traveling in key tran sportati on corridors
• Local employees
• Low in co m e families and wo rkers
• Middle school and high school students
• College students
• Seniors
• Bicyclists
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 77
T em pte Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Marketing Strategies
• MARKETING STRATEGIES
The mark eting plan should identify specific strategies and tactics to be used in achieving the
previously identified marketing goals and objectives and to address the various target market
segments. Temple City's available resources should be considered in the development of the
transit marketing strategy so that the City can achieve the intended goals in a cost effective
manner. Marketing strategies may include:
• Branding and Passenger Information -An effective branding and passenger
information strategy establishes the local transit system's identity while helping
improve the transit system 's ease of use and customer experience . This includes
incorporating the local transit system's identity to all physical components of the
system including vehicles, bus stop signage, fare media, passenger information and
promotional materials, and any other local transit services provided by the city.
Bus stops are as much a part of a local transit system as are the buses themselves. The stops,
like buses , need to have a consistent look that clearly identifies them as part of a local transit
system in order to communicate the pres ence of the transit system within the city or a specific
corridor, and to demonstrate the quality of the transit system's service.
• Awareness and Image Building -This phase uses advertising and public relations
strategies to build a transit system's public awareness and increase its perception as
being customer friendly. Specific strategies can include advertisements in local
newspapers and on the City's website , distribution of informational flyers to city
residents and businesses, the use of distinctive vehicle styles (trolleys, wrapped-
buses), and information booths at city events and festivals to inform community
members of the benefits of the new service .
• Targeted Ridership Strategies -This includes focused, community-based marketing
strategies designed to build awareness and encourage trial use among key potential
market segments. Strategies include promotional fare and/or free fare periods to
encourage ridership, and ridership promotions coordinated with local merchants
(coupons, discounts, etc .).
DIVERSIFIED TRANSP ORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 78
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Implementation Plan
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
For the implementation of the recommended transit service plan, the estimated costs of key start-
up activities for the first year of service are outlined in Tables 24 and 25. The projected costs
assume both an option with the leasing of buses and an option that includes bus purchase costs.
Table 25 : Projected Costs-Year 1 (Vehicle Purchase Option)
___ . ·_._·_ · · · Cost l item ··~~~:~~~~~,: :; :_•;.~~7 ·:\~ ~.~~·. ·~-~~P.-~ojected :.costs ~=_. i,~.· ' ,.·;
Buses (2 buses purchased) $268,216
Bus Stop Signage (24 bus stops and posts @ $500 each) $12,000
Marketing/Promotion (assumes informational flyers $4,500 delivered to each household in city)
Year 1 Estimated Operating Costs $287,100
Less: Year 1 Estimated Farebox Revenue ($34,800)
Total Projected Year 1 Start-Up Costs $537,016
Ke y milestone activities for the start-up of transit service are identified in Table 26. The timeline
of activities assumes service implementation in July 2014.
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 79
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Implementation Plan
(Th is page intenti onall y left blank)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page 80
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Appendix
APPENDIX
• Community Survey Fo rm
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page A-1
Temple City Fixed Route Transit Study Appendix
(This page intentionall y left b lank)
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page A-2
T em pte Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Appendix
Community Survey
The City of Temple City is in the process of developing a multi-modal
transportation network that will increase local mobility and connectivity with other
local and regional transportation networks, support economic development and
promote a sustainable community.
Transportation needs are presently provided to residents with limited mobility by
a Dial-A-Ride program, fixe d route bus transit services by Metro and Foot h ill Trans it,
and a soon to be improved network of new bike lanes .
To further enhance overall mobility and to understand how residents and
commuters travel, the city would like to assess the potential to develop a city-
wide fixed-route transit system and has developed the following survey to identify
your transportation needs and habits. Please take a moment to answer the
following questions .
l. What is your age?
0 13-19
0 20-29
0 30-39
0 40-49
0 50+
2. What is your gender?
0 Male
0 Female
3. Are you a res ide nt of Temple City?
0 Yes
If not, please indi cate what City Zip Code
4. What is your Household Income?
0 Under $25,000
0 $25,001 -$35,000
0 $35,001 -$45,000
0 $45,001 -$55,000
0 $55,001 -$65,000
0 $65,001 -$7 5,000
0 Over $75,000
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page A-3
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv
5. Do you know what transportation choices are available t o you?
0 Yes
0 No
Appendix
6. Consider the ways you travel/commute per week. For the trave l methods
listed below, indicate the total amount of times you use that method in a
typical week.
0 Walk
0 Bike
0 Vehicle
0 Public Transit
0 Bus
0 Train
0 Dial-A-Ride
7. Generally, do you drive alone?
o Yes
0 No
8. What mode do you usually take for your local (within th e City)
transportation needs?
0 Walk
0 Bike
0 Vehicle
0 Publ ic Tran sit
0 Bus
0 Train
0 Dial-A-Ride
9. If you travel locally, what destinations do you travel to ?
o Shopping
o Medical
o School
o Church
o Social/Entertainment
o Other ____________________________________________ ___
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page A-4
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Appendix
l 0. Wou ld you support a cit y-wide transit system?
D Yes. If so, why?
D No. Why not?
Comment:
ll .lf so, what local destinations would you lik e the new transit bus to reach?
l2.1f a local Temple City transit bus were available, would you use it for your
local transportation needs?
D Yes. If so, why?
D No. Why not?
Comment:
13. How much more likely would yo u take transit if the cost was:
Not li ke ly Somewhat like ly In d ifferent li ke ly Very likely
25 cents 0 0 0 0 0
50 cents 0 0 0 0 0
75 cents 0 0 0 0 0
$1 .00 0 0 0 0 0
14 . Below are features of transportation services. Please rate how important
each feature is to you, ranging from not at all important to very important.
Not important Somewhat In different Important Very
at all Important Important
Service within your 0 0 0 0 0
local community
Service beyond you r 0 0 0 0 0
local community
Service to regional 0 0 0 0 0
destinations
Daytime Service 0 0 0 0 0
Evening Se rvice 0 0 0 0 0
Weekend Service 0 0 0 0 0
Wheelchair 0 0 0 0 0
accessible vehicle
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page A-5
Temple Citv Fixed Route Transit Studv Appendix
15. To what extent do environmental concerns in f luence your day-to-day
decisions regard ing t rave l options?
Not important at all Somewhat Indif ferent Important Very Important
Important
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Page A-6
CITY OF TEMPLE CITY
CALIFORNIA
ATTACHMENT B
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING MINUTES
JULY 24,2013
1. CALL TO ORDER-
Parks and Recreation Chairman Georgina called the Special Joint Parks and
Recreation Commission and Public Safety Commission meeting to order at
6:00pm.
2. ROLLCALL
Parks and Recreation Commission
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
EXCUSED:
Commissioner-Lopez, Rosso, Haddad, Georgina
Commissioner-None
Commissioner-Fish
Parks and Recreation Vice Chairman Haddad made a motion to excuse
Commissioner Fish for cause, seconded by Commissioner Lopez and unanimously
carried.
Public Safety Commission
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
EXCUSED:
Commissioner-Clift, Haddad, Nimri, Redmond
Commissioner-None
Commissioner-Stratis
Public Safety Commissioner Nimri made a motion to excuse Chairman Stratis for
cause, seconded by Commissioner Haddad and unanimously carried.
ALSO PRESENT: Parks and Recreation Director Burroughs, Public
Safety Officer Ariizumi, Community Preservation
Officer Aceves, Public Safety & Services Secretary
Monroy, Management Analyst Chung
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairman Georgina led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS -None
Joint Meeting Minutes
Parks and Recreation Commission
Public Safety Commission
July 24, 2013
Page 3
Public Safety Commissioner Nimri made a motion to notify residents within a
300 foot radius of a proposed staging area about an upcoming meeting
discussing the revised study and proposed routes. The motion was seconded
by Public Safety Commissioner Clift and carried by the following roll call vote:
Parks and Recreation Commission
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioner-Lopez, Rosso, Haddad, Georgina
Commissioner -None
Commissioner -Fish
Commissioner-None
Public Safety Commission
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioner-Clift, Haddad, Nimri, Redmond, Stratis
Commissioner-None
Commissioner-None
Commissioner-None
6. ADJOURNMENT
Parks and Recreation Commissioner Rosso made a motion to adjourn the
meeting, seconded by Parks and Recreation Vice Chairman Haddad and
unanimously carried.
The Special Joint Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission and Public
Safety Commission adjourned at 7:56 p.rn.
Parks and Recreation Commission Chairman
Public Safety Commission Chairman
ATTEST:
Public Safety Supervisor
ATTACHMENT C
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION
TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
SEPTEMBER 18, 2013
1, CALL TO ORDER
Parks and Recreation Chairman Georgina called the Special Joint Parks and
Recreation Commission and Public Safety Commission meeting to order at 6:30
p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Parks and Recreation Commission
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
EXCUSED:
Commissioner-Fish, Haddad, Lopez, Rosso, Georgina
Commissioner-None
Commissioner-None
Public Safety Commission
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
EXCUSED:
ALSO PRESENT:
Commissioner-Ciift, Haddad, Nimri, Redmond, Stratis
Commissioner-None
Commissioner-None
Parks and Recreation Director Burroughs, Public Safety
Officer Ariizumi, Community Preservation Officer Aceves,
Management Analyst Chung, Parks and Recreation
Supervisor Koski
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairman Georgina led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS -None
5. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE FIXED ROUTE
TRANSIT STUDY
Parks and Recreation Director Burroughs provided the staff report to the Parks
and Recreation and Public Safety Commissioners.
Roderick Goldman, Diversified Transportation Solutions-Mr. Goldman provided
the Parks and Recreation and Public Safety Commissions with a brief overview
of highlights from the July 24 Fixed Route Study meeting and modifications to the
initial route proposals for the Fixed Route Study.
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES
September 18, 2013
Page 3
6. ADJOURNMENT
Parks and Recreation Commissioner Rosso made a motion to adjourn the
meeting, seconded by Public Safety Commissioner Stratis and unanimously
carried.
The Special Joint Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission and Public
Safety Commission adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
Parks and Recreation Commission Chairman
Public Safety Commission Chairman
ATTEST:
Administrative Coordinator