Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 1977-8664RESOLUTION NO. 8664 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE UPDATED TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR CHULA VISTA TRANSIT The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista, as a municipal transit operator, is required to maintain a current five-year Transit Development Program which must be annually updated to reflect service changes, completed improvements, revised estimates and revised plans, and WHEREAS, the 1977 updated program is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full, and WHEREAS, said Transit Development Program update will become a part of the Regional Transportation Plan, satisfying planning requirements for federal funding. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista that the Transit Development Program for Chula Vista Transit (FY1978-82 Update), dated March, 1977, marked as Exhibit "A" and attached hereto, be and the same is hereby adopted. Presented by Approved as to form by ~{ W. J. Robens, Director of orge Vii. Lindberg, City Atto~3ley Public Works ~- ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 14th day of June , 197 7 , by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Councilmen Scott, Egdahl, Hobel, Cox, Hyde NAYES : Councilmen None ABSENT: Councilmen None Q Mayor of the City of hula Vista ATTES City er c STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA) I~ , City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, Ca ifornl.a, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution P1o. and that the same has not been amended or repealed. DATED . City Cler t c~u~A vi S ~ A TF~A(~SI T Tran~ifi ~eve(~~~rn~nt ~r-oc~r~r~rr (~-`r ~ ~7~? _~ S 2 u~7~~fie ~ ~~~ CP~~~ ~, ' t~•~c;rC(~1, I~~l i EXH ~~~~ S tlMM11 RY Since its inception in February, 1970, until September 1976, the Chula Vista bus system remained essentially static providing intra- ci.ty service with four buses on three routes. In March, 1976, a consultant study was completed cahich formed the basis for the Chula Vista transit development program. The recommended transit improve- ment plan stressed increasing local service to complement the line- haul services provided by San Diego Transit Corporation and identified some imrnedi.ate ar_tion improvements. In April, 1976, the Chula Vista pity Council passed Resolution No. 81?_5 adopting the recommended plan as the City's TIP for inclusion in regional transportation plans. The Chula Vista TIP outlines expansion of the fixed route system over the ne::t five years. It also recommends increased service frequency and the w~dertaking of three capital improvement projects. The capital projects ar.e: construction of a centralized transfer/waiting point; construction of a bus maintenance facility; and purchase of new buses. 'rhe City has taken steps to implement the TIP. In September, 1976, t.wo new routes ~•~ere added to the system serving southwest Chula Vista and Bonita. Headways were reduced on all routes to a maximum of 60 minute. Since implcrlentation of these service improvements, the City 1-,as begun to o~_ganize its transit functions in order to accomplish the objectives of the TDP and to plan for, and monitor the performance of, the e~;panding transit system. The City has also begun to actively .seek Federal funding assistance for its capital projects and has re- ceived i:entative approval of an FALT grant ap~;i.ication to construct the transit ter.±.er and bus mainten~u2ce facility. Steps a,:~e i~ei.nq taken to establish. ar;d assure the City's eligibility for UI~ITA capital aSSlUtunCC In 11nC.~~"rtdk111C~` ti12 fleet replacement program. ~~1i111e trl.^_S~ tas'rts are being performed, i.he City is continuing to undertake the servicE~ e~_pansion and improvement activities and to refine the opcra- tion• o~ the systei~l. The f~11oT•,~i.ng ,.ages present detailed quantitative illustrations of the system's performance, its achievements relative to evaluation criteria/standards, and its expectations for the future. For the ;cost par. L, these dat~i are inte::ded to reflect changes to the original '.PDP. Data anti/c:r statistics which do not ap~~ear ]_n this update r.an be found in thc~ Chua.a Vista 't'ransit Developn~er.-c Progr~~:n l:eport (Barton Aschman Assor.iates, Inc. ; ~iarci~, 1976) . 1 I. SERVICE GUIDELINES Goals The nature, of the CVT operation, i.e., a small intra-city system abutting a large regionaJ_ system, clearly defines the goals of the system. Namely, CVT strives to: r~ Fully serve the local travel needs of Chula Vistans with mobility restrictions (i.e., meet the otherwise unsatisfied local travel demand); ~ Maximize use of the system for discretionary trips by all Chula Vistans, (i.e., increase local mobility); ~ Provide convenient access/egress to regional line-haul routes operated by SDTC. Objectives CVT System objectives for service improvement over the next five years include: o Providing service on 30-minute head~-~ays to at least IIO percent of Chula Vista's population; A To have maximum tr_ansfe.r_ time of 10 minutes bet~~reen. CVT and SI1TC r_oute~: and among CVT routes. St7ndards ~'nd Criter_.i_a Route justi~iration criteria: ~ Net cost per passenger must rot e~:ceed 1.5 times the system average. Exemption for new mutes is one year. System ef_fectivenc.ss criteria: ~ Eighty percent of d~~~elli_ng units within the principal service area should b~ ~~;ithin 1/4 mile of service. ® Fcr_ home-based trips, transfer wait time bet~eecn CV'i' ro~l.tes shot:ld not exceed 15 minutes; bet<<:een CVT and SDi``C ~,~ait time shoul_cl not exceed 1.0 minutes. o A11. bus stops sl.cuid be marked t~~ii.h route designations; schedule ino,-mation should be displayed at bus stops se.rvi.ng 50 o.r more persons daily. ~ Transi.t stat.i.~lns with shelter, seating, ].ic;Ilti.nq, and coln- prC}1C'I131Ve SCI'V1CC lnC)I'1;;at1UI1 a i~?'a1d bL p7_UV1~IE'_CI i:It Cr0:3s- routc stop serving 1.00 oi:~ more passengers daily. ~ I)c~~dileaci mi1.e~~ye should not c~xce~~d tel~ percent of reven~.ic~ nii.l.c;.z~Je . 2 _ ® Property damage accident rate should not exceed one per 100,000 miles; personal injury accident rate should not exceed one per 500,000 miles. Service Criteria: - o Service failures resulting in "missed trips" should not exceed one per month due to equipment breakdown. ® On-time performance (never early and 0-3 minutes late) should be attained at 95 percent of the stops during the base period and 85 percent during the pear period (4 p.m. to 6 p.m.). m Customer complaints should not exceed one per_ year for operator performance and one per month for equipment con- dition. e+ No standees in base period. o No load in peak period greater than 12.5 percent of seating capaci-cy. Eauipment Condition Criteria: ® Average age of fleet should rot exceed eight years. ~ Not mor.~. t~,a.~ ~v pCrCc?iil. of fii=Ct .~..liul~ be d^.c~C,l.'~1.G~~ for malntenanCe or 1"epall" at OnE~ t1mE~. - 3 - II. EY.TSTIi1G SYSTEt•1 DESCRIPTION Service Area The CVT operates principally within the confines of the City of C11ula Vista; it has minor route mileage within contiguous unin- corporated County in Bonita and in Montgomery. The service area encompasses appro}:innately 25 square miles and 75,000 residents. Based on a half-mile catchment band, the primary geographical service area totals 20 square miles. The population within the catchment band is approximately 60,000, 80 percent of the total. A current route map is presented at Figure 1. Major transfer points (i.ntra- and inter-system are presented at Figure 2. Passenger Data System ridership for 1976 was over 369,288 persons, an average of 30,800 per month. Since the implementation of service improvements and fare changes in September, 1976 monthly ?:idership has aver.ag~d 31,700. Of those, 12,400 (39~)paid full-fare; 10,400 (330} paid reduced-fare; and 8,900 (28~) hoarded by transfer or pass. Table 1 sununarizes CVT ridership history. An on-board survey of CVT riders was conducted during the pe?=iod 2/1/77 to 2/10/7'7. The findings of that survey are su?n-na?-i_zed on Table 2. Based on boarding/alighting data gathered during the survey the average trip length o.~ CVT passengers is four miJ_es. CVT System changes in September, 1976 included an incr_oae in the base fare from ?.5 to 35 cents; i:l'~~oducti~~n of reduced (15~) fares fa r_ senior citizens (60 or over.) and handicapped; algid maintenance of r.cduced fares for juniors (high school or ur_dcr). These fare ohanges did not have arty appreciable impact= o.~ total ridership b-.~t did cause a shift in the prapoi~t~_or.s of fare cate- gories. Average full-fare ridership ciecreaS<d ley slightly more than 4,300 persons/rlonth while average reduce:l-fare ridership lI"ICrC'a~(.'.Cl by a nearly equal ai~lOUnt; a result of expanded reaucC'C:- fare elicJibility. The average fare remained re1_atively- r_onstarzt_ at 18 cents per passenger. Tl.e average fare per revenue - pas- senger (i.e., excluding t?.ansfers) is appro:~:Jmately ?5 cents. Table 3 presents route-specific CVT ridership statistics. System Data CVT wcel~d~ y sere:ice is provided bet~•r~en 6:00 a.rn. and 10:00 p.m. Route-specific and total system operating arc', netwo.r>; stai=isticU, with current operations, arr presented on Table 4. Effi.cici~c:~~ i•leasu~-es Tables 5 summarizes efficiency measur.~s for the current CVT ope.r_a- tior-IS . e ~ ` P ~!` x~ ~~ 0 O a p...l ! ,~, !~ ;, ~, > r .~~ ~ ~ • i. '~s 6,~ ~:~~ ~ n `w .tg z „' _~ r ~" ~ d ~ ~^I n 0 l ~ r ,td~fs+© Q'. (t 0.q-,! v s" J'a`~ VlS,in VN 3,1F v~ e7 'S- 0 6 d w O~D W Z ~, a n Q 3 ,/ r W ~ 3 a r a N W > ~ Q Q N 1-, W C ,V v Figure 1 _ N r7 V N ~ W Vl W W W ~ = ~ ~ 7 41 0 0 0 O O ~ W rr cr a ~ ~ J ®0 a ®a X ~Q. ~P O O 3~;~ O~b~9 ~ pNy~~O W O z a a 0 rr~ V/ LL~ 1~ W J ~" w 1 ~~ti ~3pNb3~p Spa 31V1S2i31N1 1~.w w Q o ~ u~ a o „~ o ~ LL a a. X p, 6 O Z W W oil ~~© C~ ` h 1 1 3f~~ 1S ~ O ~~ .3nV QtSZ -e-QJp 4 t~~~~~~_~ aaoF.~'~~~I~j H1V e ~~~ ~ ~~~• r 1 A Q'~ ~ 1 ~,~s4' u1 v ~y'~~.~~y ". W 1~.._ y ~ n "" J Alin Q _--~ ~~oO~':~ f,, ~~~~~~~ 1 : - " ~'~ ~'~( ~@ .® i _) (v'r„a 1 _1 __ • SWEE~WpSE° MESA V15jA~ BON A RD i p RD 1 5 29 BONiTA MES 1 C 5' ii ~ N Orgy 1 +, ~ 4 i O ~ ~' O t../ ~~s ~''O . 1 •t- ~ ~ y~ 1 i, ST ~. ~ .~ 1. ~ 1 'v _.~ Q J I 5 ~~ Jt f ~~ ~~ ' , 323 C ~AS~ ~ J _ ~• /~ ,~- i ,~ ~ _~r ~ ~ ~ ,1 `cam n ~ i ~ _ 1 1 ~ __ tcR _ 11 "` 3 ~ :. 1 _ i ',' 1 , ' C ~ 1 ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ / ••~ 1 ti to ~ 1 `', 5 T ' > h > J ~' ~ ~ c ~ 3 4 a Q r U Z 1i cT 4 `n_ 4. t. K i N O W 2' ~~ v , 2 a ~ z {N ST a J c - G ,~ 1 ~- 1 til ~ 5 ~ ~ GFt Po N i t~ rl~ '1''. ~~ ~ r~~SS ~ NAPLES ~ 3 - '(F-~'~ ii G'~. al ~ Z F ~• X ~~ zJT~ ~~ ~ Z ~~S,o ~ h ;f `_f o '", ~~ E• OXFORD ~ ~~ 0 0 CVT Routes ~' c~ ~ ~9 CJ q 2 <a •9 (D i _-- Pp`OMpR w li E• ~ ~ SDTC Routes ~' I •, W II ~V1N, pR0 Z ~ E ORANGE ~~ CHULA !/ISTA TRANSIT ,: ;; 1 r ~ ._ I~i`dA.a®R TRANSI=ER P®It\1TS ~i n c - w hagrNST-DTgy ~ ~ o ,R I ' t TABLE 1 CHULA VIS`T'A TRANSIT RIDERSHIP Year Month 1973 1974 1975 1976 January 13,786 21,697 25,952 30,595 February 13,052 22,106 23,2.37 28,292 I~farch 14,481 23,892 25,080 34,019 April' 13,454 23,802 ?_6,986 29,483 clay 14,822 24,015 27,646 31,576 Jude 15,086 22,681 25,385 29,822 July 14,286 23,554 28,1.42 29,068 August 15,492 23,325 23,775 31,104 ~~N LC~i:~ber 17, V iJ 2J,1UJ G7,,iVU 29 93 / Octorer 17,558 27,139 30,944 31,662 November 20,781 28,485 30,605 31,589 December ___ 19,589 25,095 ?_9,668 32,0:1. `I'OT:~L 189, 706 290, 976 324, 928 369, 282 I~lonthly Avera,e 15,809 24,248 27,077 30,774 Perrer~t Growth c. 29 53 1?. 1.4 t TABLE 2 CHULA VISTA TRANSIT RIDER PROI'ILE* Trip Purpose tti'ork School Shopping Recreation Other Employment Status Employed See}_ing Employment Retired College Student Other Studeni Unemployed Access I~:ode t9a -!. k CVT Transfer SDTC Transfer Other Frequency o-f Use 5-7 days/~aeek 3-4 days, ~~.~.ek 1-2 da~rs/week Less than i day/wee}~ $ A.-~ $ 17 15 or less 13 54 16-24 44 12 25-44 18 4 45-59 13 13 60-64 4 65 or over 8 Autos i.n Houschc].d 27 Zero 39 3 One 30 12 Two 20 28 Three or more 11 20 9 s Egre:;U Mode 77 t-J<~J.k 84 5 CVT ~~'ransfer 4 15 SDTC Transfer 10 3 Other 2. o Fare C~,tec~orl" 59 Full-fare 54 20 Reduced-faa.e 25 14 Transfer 8 6 Pass 13 *Dascd on an on-board survey conducted in I'ebruary, 1977. f TABLE 3 CVT RIDERSHIP STATISTICS' Route Fare Category 1 2 3 4 5 All Full-Fare 3,039 3,614 435 4,372 1,518 12,978 Reduced-Fare: © Juniors 3,504 2,268 588 1,231 814 8,405 ~ Senior_s** 64 684 31 101 38 918 o TOTAL 3,568 2,952 619 1,332 852 9,32.3 Passes 1,081 1,041 134 1,794 554 4,604 Transfers n CVT 168 184 31 ~ 285 62 730 e SDTC J_, 303 1,280 168 112 440 3,303 ~ TO`1'AL 1, 471 1, 464 199 397 502 /x , U33 Grand 7'OT~:L 9,159 9,071 1,387 7,895 3,42E 30,938 * Values are for the month of October, 1976 **Includes handicapped TABLE 4 , CVT SYSTLii CHARACTERISTICS* Characteristic Route All 1 2 3 4 5 route I~ii.les 87.7 15.4 16.3 ,ine IL7i1es 41.3 -- -- .nnual Vehicles I~Ziles (OCO) c.463.7 -- -- >nnual Service I,iiles (000) 417.8 75.4 84. 8 zoute T~rpe -- LocaJ_ Loca_I_ requency (mi_n) -- 60 60 ~'ransit VehicJ.es 10 -- -- ~vcr~:ge Vei,.icle Age 16.8 yrs. -._ __ ~'ue1. Consump~.ion (ga.J_) 97; C00 -- -- gyp, .rating Hour_ s ~~~eekdays -- 1G 16 c: Saturcia_v -- 16 11 a Sunday -- -- 11 round Tries/i,,ee}c 469 9G 102 14.7 19.0 22.3 68.2 88.?_ 101.2 Local Local Local GO 60 60 16 15 15.5 11 ll 11.5 91 9J. 89 -23a:~~d on Current le\~el of SE'rV1C:e i TABLE 5~ CVT EFFICIENCY NIEASURES* R_o_u t e Measure All 1 2 3 4 5 Passengers/Mile 0.89 1.43 1.25 0.24 1.06 0.40 Gross Cost/Passenger 0.96 0.60 0.69 3.56 0.81 2.14 Net Cost/Passenger 0.78 0.43 0.51 3.39 0.59 1.97 Net Cost/Mile 0.70 0.G2 0.63 0.82 0.63 0.79 Pass-Mil/Gallon. Fuel 21 34 30 6 25 10 *Based nn data for the month of Octobor, 1.976. - 4 - III. EVALUATIOi~ CVT route and system evaluation is accomplished by inspection of Table 6, which presents the applied standard for each evaluation criterion and the corresponding actual value exhibited by the system. Deficiencies and a brief summary of cause are presented below: e Transfer Times - Maximum wait tune exceeds the standard at live infra-system points and three inter.-system points The major cause is the inflc}:ibility of 60-minute head~aays on CV`i'; full implementation of the TDP wi]_1 allow the standards to be met and e}:ceeded . o Bus Stops - P.oute and schedule information displays do not rncet standards. Appropriate displays are being designed and will be ordered within the ner>t year. e~ Transit _Station__s - There are no existing stations; i_t is estimated treat six lor_ations in the City meet the ~•larrants. Instal lati_on of stations ~•:ith po:~si.ble minor street changes will be in~~Testigated in the upcoming year. ~ Deadheadi~:ileaae - Thy present deadhead mileage is high for_ a five-route sy,~stem, mail:iy because maintenance is performed at tine Aztec yards in San Diego. It is felt that deadhead mileage can be reduced by improved b115 rotation (fo.r main- tenance). a Iic_ci_d.ont R~:te - Prop~art~,~ damage accidents i n 1976 exceeded the sta:Ida:,_d by a consi der_able margin; per:. :;n~~ in jL.r~i~ acci- dents also exceeded the standard rate. All acci_den~.s ~ahi.c:h were found tc be the result of bus driver negligence resulted in ter_minati_on or suspeasi.on of -the affected driver. Service perorrnance data have not been properly identified and/or recor~ucd in she past to pern;it evaluation at this ti nee. Froccdu~~es are noc•~ in e~f~~c~ or being developed to ,~1~ i.ntain such d~+_t~~. It is qualitative]_~• fcl.t that r1_ssed trips and on-tire p~eriorn~<nnce are ccnsic<ozably be,_e,~: standard. 'T'hese criteria arc especially imx.,crtant to passengF.•r ~ro~Jth and retentiolz and im~~rovc,ni_~nts to reliabili_t~,~ shou:Id b~ r`flected in in:.rcased ridership. l~i.ssod trips are cspecial].y s:~z~ious wi_t.h GU-mi.llute head;:~a~'s; present indications are tll~=.t missed. trips are a resuli~ of equil~m~~nt. fail- ures wh.ic:h can be most. sic~r.i{i.c~.ntly reciuceci by repricing she ]_G- year-old l;usas. On--time I:~erfo~rlance has been la:: because of poor SChedlllinc} ;1lld l.ll~~llf ~1Clent I:Oud SUL ei"~'7_S1017; rC~V.1S~d SCIICC~UIC'S ~:-ill be instituted shortly anc? schedule adh~~~rence ~.~ill be closely monitored ~~Ilad su~~ervised. One need for contir.u:~.~i sere%ic~_~ mol:itc,ri::c~ arul evaluation is to standar.cii:~e and or.n-zilize d~-~t~Z collection/roln;lil<~i.ion/repor.ti_nc~, a11:~ t0 2'C;:1nE; the ('V~11.Ua~1011 pl-OCeC1l1rC. A COP.1pl1t:C1'.17CC1 j•ii;I1~iC.jLIl1E?rl~: TABLB 6 CVT ROUTE AND SYSTEi~S ?;VALUATION SUIfu~4ARY* Applied Actual** Criterion Standard Value Route Justification o Route 1 e Route 2 o Route 3 e Route 4 ® Route 5 System Effectiveness DU's in Service Area Transfer Time: © CVT/CVT (15 mi-n.J c~ CVT/SDTC (10 rtii~. ) Bus Stops: c. Route designations ~ Scree;,los Transit Stations Deadhead I~iileage Accident R<~te: a Property Dari~age 6 Persar~al Injury Service Pe.rforl..ance rlissed Trips On-Time Complaints: Operator ~ Equ~_pn:ent St~:ndees Pea}; Load E ui~~n:~nt Condition _~ `_ -- -- Average aqe of fleet Over 2.0 percent c:eadlined 1.17 0.42 + 0.48 + 3. 3 5 - (ne~•~ route } 0.57 + 1.94 - (new route) 80o c.80o 0 5 - 0~ 3 - 1000 120 - c.30 c.20 - c.G 0 - 10~ llo - 1 ]_ . 2 8 - 0.2 0.26 - 12 N.A. 95/85 N.A. 1 1 + 12 N.r'~. 0 0 + C 0 + 8 yrs 16.8 yr_s. - 0 N.A. * See stal:d~rds and criteria desc.ription~, for explan~-~tion of par~~>>lrtcr value. ~'~'~~P1L1S" r1~J17 (+} lll~~lCateS ~c.IVUri1~1C'. C:O'.lipal'15C?n t~~l{:I1 St~lilClard; "illlnll::~~ sa_gn (-) 111i~.1CatE'..f; LI1~~1VOra~~~.C CO?lir~::)'1SOn. __ _ t - 5 - Information System has been developed to compile and store basic system statistics (ri.dership, fare, mileage) and to periodically report the data. 11n accountant has been selected to perform an analysis of cost accounting and to develop correlated financial/ operational parameters for subsequent use in system planning and evaluation. System deficiencies include: ® Excessive headways - Present headways (60-minutes) are twice as long as~called for in the TUP. The effects of long headways on ridership potential are substantial except for necessary trips made by transit captives. ~ Route E:;tensions - The residents of Vest Chula Vist=.a and many persans in Lon_ita are not ad~quatcly served by transit for east-~~~est triUS. The di.ssalution of San Diego Economy Lines, Inc. has left numeraus persons near Chula Vista w.ith- oui. transit service. o Fleet Requirements - Replacement vehicles are required to reduce repair cots and in-service brcal:do~,~ns, ~~~hich seriously disrupt service. t - 6 - IV. TRANSIT OPI;RIITIONS PI:OGRIIM Table 7 summarizes the major capital and operating projects in the five-year improvement program. FY77-78 Program of Projects Significant service and system improvements were recommended in the TDP for_ the fiscal Year 1977-78, including construction of a bus maintenance facility, construction. of a Transit Center (terminal), initial bus purchases, and pur.chasc and insta]_lati.on of bus stop equipment. The current schedule for "1'DP imp)_ementa- tion indicates that these activities will at least begin in I'Y78, with the probable exception of the bus maintenance f.acil i_t.y. In addition to the capital projects, numerous ser_vico imprG~rem~~nts will be implemented for FY78. The fol].owi.ng describes the expected route/schedule changes and capital projects for FY78: ~ New Route h - 11 C3D shuttle in downtown Chula Vista to im- prove downtown circulation; improve inter-system transfers; and improve intra-system transfer. 8 Institution of a specialized demand-responsive service for the Beverly handicapped, retarded, feeble, etc. who canno'~ use the CVT scl.eduled service. o Route/schedule refinement;: Lon a_1_J. routes - im~~rGVe ~~r~,~_~_ce to m~?jor gel:c~~ator.s (Rcllr, Souti?w~,si:~rn C:o:c_l~.y~} , ilnr:~r~;v schedule adherence, improve r.outE: E~Lficierlcies. ~+ Transit Center - Site selection, de_;i.gn and construction of a transit focal point in do~antGCan Chula Vista. ® Purcha: ~ eight b1?Se5 - SllbjeCt to approves]. of- UT~iTA Cap:i.tal grant request, order replacement buses (8}. In FY 1977-73, the C~.'~i' system is progralr~nled to h:~ve five 1.GCa1 routes and an added CI3D shuttle. It is also po:_s_:_blc the?t. ~: srnal].- scale c'.en?and-respons.i~.Jo se?-~,ricc will I~~~ iilitiate:d to car. ry the sevorly h<<Ildicapr~~`d. Other j~GSSible se^rvices ~~.I:c: ].ude e~~'•1:~. ^~:J .LC/11 and/or Ey:,t_C?nSiGn Gi ~eZVlCe 1I1 I?Gnita l.`l rLp1C~.C.E~ JC~~ v~CE~` ~_•~/1 rlnl-~ -, prOVldeC1 1%y the ~ial7 )~1C:Cj0 rCOnGI??y I.,7nC?; and aC:Cllt_LGnal p':ir: 1~C'1'1_Cd tr].p.:a t0 SJUt;hiiC'StCrl COlICgL• Table L ^-,U?;?lliat"iZGS S~'BtE:lil C:llc12'ciC,- terlStlCS and projections fGr the p,=orran'i1lCC: SyStE'_nl lIl I'i'77--7u. Lxtendecl Four-Year Pro~~rarn The ren?ainder of tl?~~ irnnrovcments reco.nnu~ndc~d in the Chula ~?ist~~l TllI~ are :~crec7uled for co:r~~letion dL?ri.I?g fiscal Ye~?r.s 79-u2. The~,c iI:?,,ruveluc:?ts illclucc: o Site selection, design and construction of: a bus rn,:?i_nten- ance facility; o L.~a~;.nsion frc>m six routes to ci.c;llt; aI1d t TABLE 7 FIVE-YEAR IMPROVEt~,ENT PROGRAM (FY78-82) Fiscal Year Projects 77-78 78-79 79-80 80-81 81-8??_ Capital: ca Transit Center X ® Maintenance facility X ra Bus Purchase -- Phase I X Q Bt~s Purchase - Phase TI y, ~y Bus Stop Improvements X X X Operating: c~ Im,_~Ie^~en~~ F~andirapped c~ t• ~~_,-F X ~ r';Y}Jc~nd t0 S.1_x RUt1t.E'_S X b Reduce Headc,rays to 30 min. X ~ Expand to eight Routes X e Reiinc A7.1 Routes Und Schedules X X f Table 8 - PROGRAT~IMED CVT SYSTEhI* (F1'77-78) Route System Char.acteristi.cs All 1 2• 3 4 5 6 Route Miles 89.7 15.4 15.6 16.0 19.0 20.4 3.3 Line Miles 41,6 __ __ __ __ __ __ Revenue Mi.les(000) 438.0 75.5 81.1 74.3 88.2 94.7 24.2 Route Type -- Local Local Local Local Local Shuttle Frequency (min.) -- 60 60 60 60 GO 20 Vehicles 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- Operating Hours: ~ tv'ee~:days -- ].6 16 16 16 16 8 Saturday -- 1G 11 11 11 11 8 Round ~~~.rips/4ti~eek 615 96 102 91 91 91 144 Projected Riders}Zip(U00) 456 116 115 20 100 4S 60 Projected Revenue (ti 000) 79 19 21 3 22 8 6 *lloes not incJ_ude special service for severcl_y hanclic~.ippea. -~- • Reduction of headways from GO-minutes to 30-minutes. In order to implement the route network expansion and the improve- ments to service frequency, it will be necessary to increase the fleet. Table 9 summarizes projected system characteristics for the period including Fiscal Years 1979-to 1982. Transportation ?•lanagement Elements • A CBD shuttle service is the fourth quarter of FY over a 3.3 mile route on is designed to: improve improve CVT/CVT transfer transfer. scheduled for_ implementation in 76-77. The shuttle will operate 20-minute headways. The service downtoten access and circulation; coordination; and i_mprcve CVT/SDTC ca The general intent of CVT is to pro~Tide full accessibility to the system for the majority of handicapped and elderly. The mcbi'_i_'~,z reeds of the non-ambulatory a?-c presently being investigated and it is tl:'iOSSi_b1G that a demand--actuated, lift-equip~~ d vehicle can be in servi~,4~ during r ~'7 7-78 , This service ~,~ould most probably be a separate operating division of CVT. a Tm1rovem;.nt:s uo pG~cen.~~,r U.rncnities ?_nclude il:-callation cf O~ bllS StC;p LLnChES; 1nStaJ_l~1i:1On Of nE:SJ })US StOT~ S1CjnS, utilizing sy;nbolic ciesign; and improved transii: :Lnformation at buy stop ~. The })u~~ sto}_~ si.cns hav:, been o?-c~c,rcd and G'~i_1.1 be 1?1Stc:l~.ed s}portly; bF'T~C'}:tS V 11.1 }7e Orde?=C~ In thP. 1mP.idlate LUture, c1n(} bllS St.Oi7 1rifO2"P,'.,lt:1O11 CilSpl%''`.';~ a2:e being designed to shoea ne;•~ routes anti scrledui.es. µf o T}"Ie CVT n;arketing prot~?ram }Zas been crreatly exp,ncieu in the pact ~'£'aT, \'Jlt=}1 e.i?~%}:? l v OI7 S?;CC1f1C prOi':iOt1OIiS. 1'L1C': Iil:?I~}:et- ing budget incr.eascci from ;520 in FYiS-7G to $10,460 in rl'7G-77, c~?1 1nd1Cc'.t7.Oil GL t}1C 1.nCrec~~c'_'Ct El?l'J}?~u315 On In:~l"};~t- ing t}le trc??1Slt S('r\%1CE. 1•'Uti)1'P i;lari;.C:t1IlCi f'{1:CGrt~: \v 1.11 COrI- tinue to be p~:.cr?otio:.~-:;peci.fic and t•:i_.i_1 include dc,or-to-- docr deli_vc~r1~ of CVO' sch~:dules and mat_~~. c A consul ~~-~nt: planning study i.s Ding pzc+pareci to ilzvestigate the cost/:_e.rvice le~Te~' c}]ar~.cte.risties o.t CV`l' to properly budget SL?b,~C:C[UGnt ~yC'Cirs, t0 P:lOn.ltOr C0:3tS, and tO m~Cc~1SUlC t:he Varlii}J1<? COSt Oi St'rV1C0. f_? ~. COmpllt~:,]"1'I.C? ~ i~ian,ZC:CT?lt?I1t IniOl-matlOn ~;ySteln \';};1C}1 I??a].n- tains ciai.)', rLCO~"t?~; o~ n?i_lea<-~_~, revent~i~ rind riu~~r~}-Ii:) b~- f«rC' Cil.'.1~~-~~)1-~,' C1 :3S i~~:t~ll }:?~.~1CC~ OI7 11i1C ~-i11C} l:i nO\'; ~C1I1%I 7"Cl:lllilt~. `1'hi i SyS:'.C':11, t~~1}C(?n tO~;i~thCr \~'~.t}1 COSt dijt,l fror,l t}1e? COI1-- stlltcli]i: :;i:.t'.ii~' x•;111 C}C'~.all C~`.i' OL~LI~~-1t1IiC~ StatlStl.CS. t TABLE 9 PROJECTED CVT SYSTEri (FY79 to FY82)* . _F_iscal Year_ stem Characteristics 78-79 79-80 8U-81 81-82 Route Miles 90 90 100 100 Revenue Miles 852 852 954 954 P~Iaxin:ul~ Headway 30 30 30 30 Oper.~xti.ng Fleet 11 11 13 13 Vehir.les 15 15 16 16 Round Trips/rVeek 1100 1100 1300 1300 Ridersh_t (000) 62U 870 900 960 Revenue~'~~` ($OOG) 112 157 162 173 * Does not =include special service for se~~er~~1y han~?lcapt eri. **A~s~:r<<es no f~ re increase. t ' ~ ' V. FINANCIAL PROGRAM - 8 - Table 10 illustrates the cost revenue history of_ CVT operations over the most recently completed five Fiscal Years. In Fiscal Year 75-76 the tota]_ cost of operation was approximately $205,000. In that same period fare box revenues recovered $55,000 or approxi- mately 27 percent of the total cost. T}7e remainder. of the neces- sary revenue was obtained through Local 'Transportation Fund and City sources. Future CVT funding i_s presumed to rely on presently existing sources; principalJ.y, the LTF, continued City assistance and possible Federal capital and operating assistance. A key element in long germ budg~t- ing of the CVT system is the reasonable expectation of t}7e availa- bility of LTF funds. Table 11 summarizer the anticipated LTF re- sources available to the City of_ Chula Vista for the five year period fro:r: F1'78 to 1'Y82 inclusive. Lasic presumptions used in preparing these estimates were: a That Chula Vista's apportionment of the total LTF funds would increase annually at a modest rate. a Thal: the level of service provided b~,~ San Ui~~~go Transit would stay approximately the smile as presently pr_OVided anti teat the cent of_ t.hose services ~~;ollld. ircre~se ~!t ~ rate com~~al.-a- ble to the rate of increase for t}ie LT]~ Lands. a That C`lu)_a Vi 5ta Transit I,Tr cla_~rl. ~aculd continue to be subjer_t to 50 percent claim limit.ati_ons. The projected CVT cost/revenue p.-~cture Lcl~ tl7e I:'?_.:cal Years 73- 82 1nC1_US~_Ve 1S presE:ri-!':ed Ui1 `~~able 12. ?c~.lOr fc:CtiJr;~ ].1"'fi'.:~C'i1C;~:'CJ the estiiYlate of costs are t}?e ur }_t opera! ci.lq cost, t}7 e_' ic:voi of S:'7"V1Ce i 1''U~'"~ded, aI':Ca, ti.e Capltal hrU~CCtS prO~yrcLl. Bc; ._ _ s_. pre - sulnptians in the revenue forecast include: eligibilii.y for. U~}~'~ Caj~itc 1 a:,slst«nce; L11"131 ap;??"U~~al. of 1`t~I1C:11.T:g I':1:; ~Yallt ~'J'._~_l_.'.•_Cc?f]_O,Ii~; eL'G•`1tL!Cl.~ rt?^E~l',JL Of L:•1`l~~ Section 5 OjJ ri,t1_nC~ a~,~_~_stalic'E'; d'.~CI I1iC':C~;t:. 111C:CCi:i'E'S lYl rldelt~'~ilp and r:z?"E'.}SOX r:?VU1111C? {nO fal"E? 117Cr°c'..SC 1S presu~.~ed in the preparation of these esti_1~;~~tes) . The ~?:-ogr_1~:I prESCntE':~ 111 T~ibi+~ 1 ~ re)_CC i:,~~ t'7^ ~ ~C"tC,d C'7:1;>tr~i ~:1t'.Ci CO:lditlOri;, t}lat 1S, t;5~lm~_t~_S prC~arCC''. I~:.:SE,d C' 1_Stli1.C; ~unCi SOUI'Ct'sS. It GOcS, c?'.~ t}iE' Saii'tc t.1mE?, 1"EZ~YE'.~ie'.;lt I"C'CO1l'.i~:~'.I:i1C?C? pl-Oc~r3m. IVO .`iE'pa?"~i:'.lOn 1S ??C'.CC'SS~1"y sli1CC It 1~ :1tiC'1p~itC'C~ thCli~ t}7e 1"CCOI;;I;:CI1C.t?d ~>]:'OC: ~'ci'll C~:in }~t~ c?CCQIi1;~1 1_S}1~~~Q t~llt},1117 t}1 c' c1V llc,}./1.1. i.-1' of funds from c~:isting sources. It s}iaul.d be notc~cl th~-1t at t}Ie b_.:-_c level of service provi;~.ed by CVT, if file planned irlprove.nt,~nt:s must be curtai.lec) bccau,~~ of a lac}: of funds thcl elcnl~~l7ts to bo eli.mi.nai.ec3. stloulci be decided on a case-b~•-else basis at t}ic nc~cess~~l~y time. t TABLE IO CVT COST/REVENUE HISTORY Fiscal Year 1-"/2 72-73 73-74 ~'otal Cost revenue: o Firebox o City es LTF ~ Interest m Tota]_ $67,458 $72,149 $]_10,906 4-75 $176,038 75-76 $204,739 3,412* 4,1.05* 12,344 55,315 54,905 64,046 68,044 50,080 29,230 29,280 0 0 48,482 91,443 119,750 N/A __ N/71 ~ N/~'~ N/A 8 0 4 $67,458 $72,149 $110,905 $1.76,033 $204,739 L-'xcess F.evenue reccivc:i by City per service contras ~ ~:grceme~:~t. ti M ' TABLE 11 ANTICIPATED LTF _)_977--78 RESOURCES 1978-79 (P'Y78-82)* fiscal Year _ 17U-20 _ _ 1980-II1 ]_987.-8?_ Ea]_ance For;aard 608 80"1 635 716 5G3 (July 1) Ap?ortionment 7]_9 755 792 832 874 SD'1'C Claim 153 160 16E 177 ]_g6 Sub-balance 1174 1402 1259 1371 125)_ CVT Claim 367 767 5~?3 808 760 Balance 807 635 716 563 491 (J~,:ne 30} * All figt?res are in thousands of dollars TABLE 12 PROJECTED CVT COSTS/REVENUES (FY78-82) Fiscal Year 77-78 78-70 79-80 80-81 81-82 COST Operating Cost 424 862 905 1,050 1,100 Capital Cost: w Transit Center 140 -- -- __ __ a: Garage -- 400 -- -- -- o Buses -- 560 -- 640 -- c~ Other ` 50 20 50 50 100 Subto to 1 19 0 __---- -~9 8 0 a,. .~..._,_ 5 0 __ a,s _,~-.~.6 9 0 d__._..~._..l 0 0 .iotaJ_ Cost b14 1,8~;1 055 1,740 1,200 -'.E~'ENi1E Federal o Capital. 1151 7682 -- 5123 -._ ~ Operating -- 140 171 -- -- 'TF' 300 767 543 808 760 ,areboi:4 70 1J_2 157 162 173 'ity 30 55 84 258 2G7 'otal RetT~~nue _ 6J-`~_ ` 1,£42 955 .1,740 1,?.00 -- - A11 fic;"r~~,; ar_e t?IOUSa.ncJs of dollars -) Sou.rcc: FAU cr~:it ') Scrircr:s: $32 ~, ~~00 - F'AtT; $440, 000 - U~~1TA (S. 3) Pre s,.ii;~;~tions: o ?!ocic~st ri dershi.,~ gains o No fare i ncrcasc:.