HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-09-30 - AGENDA REPORTS - ARROYO SECO ASSOCIATES (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jeff Kolin, Deputy City Manager, Public
DATE: September 30, 1992
SUBJECT: ARROYO SECO ASSOCIATES/MUNICIPAL RESOURCE CONSULTANTS
EVALUATION OF CITY TRANSIT SERVICES
BACKGROUND
The City contracted with Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc. and Municipal Resource Consultants
(ASA/MRC) to review the City's Transit service and operations. This report summarizes the
findings of the consultants and action staff can pursue to improve transit performance. The
completed summary report is provided as Attachment A.
Local Fixed Route
Local Fixed Route service generates few complaints, and experienced a 20% increase in
ridership in the past year. The routes are fairly direct and straightforward, a positive aspect
that can encourage ridership. However, there has been no marketing of the service
(inhibiting ridership), there is excessive layover time on most bus routes (inhibiting
productivity) and there is lack of data needed to make many service adjustment decisions.
(The data available and used by ASA/MRC does provide an accurate picture of system level
performance; but does not provide information at the line segment, bus stop or trip level).
Also, due to the newness of the system, there is a dearth of written policies and many grey
areas in the contract between Santa Clarita and ATE/Ryder.
The following actions are being undertaken by staff to improve local fixed route service.
Service changes are being proposed for.October 26, 1992 to serve Metrolink, improve
service to Valencia Town Center, reduce excessive layover times and make other
service improvements that can be recommended with the limited resources and data
available at this time.
2. Begin collecting ridership data by trip based on boardings and alightings at each bus
stop. This will be done by sampling each trip several times over a multi -month
period. This will provide the critical data needed to determine the productive and
unproductive trips, route segments and bus stops and allow us to make further
adjustments to service next year to further increase ridership and improve
productivity.
f.
Council Study Session
ASA/MRC Evaluation of City Transit Services
September 30, 1992
Page 2
3. Develop a marketing plan. In advance of a marketing plan, several actions will be
taken immediately to promote and inform the public of transit services. These include
a new single timetable for all transit services, distribution of these timetables at more
locations, including all promotional activities for Metrolink, and increasing the
number of pass sales outlets. Other actions under consideration include providing
free ride coupons at Metrolink promotional activities, and developing packets for new
residents.
4. Staff will begin meeting with ATE/Ryder to negotiate more specific language
covering the "grey" areas in the current contract and to improve adherence to other
contract provisions. Regular reports from ATE/Ryder will become mandatory to
improve monitoring of service performance.
5. Develop a list of 10-12 peer transit agencies from which operating data will be
collected periodically. This information will assist in the development of performance
targets for the transit system and provide a yardstick from which system performance
can be measured.
In addition to the above actions, the following activities will be pursued; however, these will
require additional guidance and/or action by the City Council.
Establishment of a vision statement and goals and objectives for fixed route service.
This would include establishing performance targets for established service and
policies for service expansion.
2. Fare adjustments to reduce subsidy requirements.
3. Upon completion of the marketing plan, additional resources may need to be
identified or Council action may be needed before some recommendations can be
implemented.
4. Staff will continue to seek out all available funding sources and with Council
direction, lobby for potential new Federal and State funding sources to allow
expansion of the Transit program.
Council Study Session
ASA/MRC Evaluation of City Transit Services
September 30, 1992
Page 3
Commuter Bus
Of the three types of transit service provided by Santa Clarita Transit, the commuter bus
service has the best operating performance and highest customer satisfaction. Although
ridership dipped in April and May, probably due to the civil unrest in Los Angeles, ridership
is continuing to grow. Preliminary data for July and August (not available for the
ASA/MRC report) shows continued growth in what would normally be low ridership months.
A ninth bus was added in July to alleviate standees on some trips and ridership seems to have
grown to fill at least half of the added seats.
All of the actions relating to local fixed route would also apply to commuter services. In
addition, ridership will be closely monitored vis-a-vis the implementation of commuter rail
service.
Dial -a -Ride
Dial -a -Ride (DAR) services has been the focus of considerable attention over the past few
months. A majority of the efforts by ASA was reviewing DAR records. While no fraud or
illegal activities were uncovered, there are some serious management problems that need to
be addressed.
Staff is undertaking the following actions to improve DAR service and management.
Conducted a customer service training for all Transit employees of ATE/Ryder and
the City of Santa Clarita on August 30, 1992.
2. Develop a "no show" and cancellation policy which will allow us to reduce our
standing orders or subscription service from 80% to between 50% and 60%creating
more capacity for 24-hour call-in reservations.
3. Formalize our curb -to -curb policy and work with the Santa Clarita Valley Senior
Center and IEV0I1 M Adult Day Care Center to develop a volunteer escort for the
elderly and handicapped.
4. Reduce reservation times to 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon to allow more time for
scheduling routes and a guaranteed response to reservation requests by 5:00 p.m, of
the same day.
5. Work with the Santa Clarita Valley Senior Center to establish a cooperative working
relationship which includes coordination of Senior transit needs and grouping of Dial -
a -Ride reservations to maximize the efficiency of the system. The specific items are
identified in the MOU between the Senior Center and the City.
Council Study Session
ASA/MRC Evaluation of City Transit Services
September 30, 1992
Page 4
6. Continue'to record all complaints on complaint forms and track their resolution.
Develop a quarterly report which summarizes the complaints received and categorizes
them according to the type of service and complaint.
7. Purchase a telephone recording system which allows for all incoming calls to be
recorded between Dial -a -Ride dispatchers and the public.
8. Develop a printed driver's handbook and rule book.
9. Develop a Transit User's guide and Transit User's Tips publication.
10. Work with ATE/Ryder to reduce the current high level (40%) of unproductive driver
time.
11. Proposed extensions of fixed route service to Santa Clarity Senior Center and LARC
Ranch should allow many DAR customers to begin using fixed route service.
12. ATE to hire additional part time telephone answering staff for 6:00a.m. to 11:00a.m.
13. Establish a cancellation hotline number for reservation cancellations.
14. Complete improvements to Corporate Yard for Transit operations.
15. Establish DAR Improvement Task Force of ATE employees and City Transit staff.
In addition, the following actions which have cost and/or service implications are under
consideration and will need Council direction.
1. Eliminate General Public Dial -a -Ride service during the daytime hours and restrict
General Public Dial -a -Ride service to evening hours when local fixed route service is
unavailable. This would increase capacity for senior and disabled users.
2. Expand the number of vans operated by ATE/Ryder and authorize more service hours
under the contract.
Contract with local taxi and/or shuttle services for a voucher system. Vouchers
would be distributed to disabled and elderly who cannot be accommodated by the
existing Dial -a -Ride system or for trips which are identified as outside of our service
area.
Council Study Session
ASA/MRC Evaluation of City Transit Services
September 30, 1992
Page 5
4. Conduct annual service audits and detailed analysis of trip pick up points and
destinations for the Dial -a -Ride transit program, local fixed route and commuter
services. Use the data to refine the Transit systems and maximize the revenue
received.
5. Increase the fares for use of the Dial -a -Ride system to encourage more ridership on
the local fixed route system.
6. Establish a Mission Statement, and goals and objectives for the DAR system that
would include minimum passenger loads for start of service.
Options Available to the City and Resulting Impacts Should Paratransit Services be
Discontinued.
Some form of paratransit service will be required to comply with the Americans With
Disabilities Act and will be mandated by the Los Angeles County Transportation
Commission in order to provide feeder services to the Commuter Rail Station.
Existing Dial -a -Ride paratransit programs seem to meet these mandates, therefore any
alternative needs to also meet these mandates.
2. Reduced spending on Dial -a -Ride programs could be funnelled into expanded fixed
route services.
3. Elimination of the Dial -a -Ride program and the resulting funding could be used to
fund a comprehensive voucher program.
4. Contractual obligations to ATE/Ryder provide noticing requirements for
discontinuation of all or portions of the contract.
5. It is unlikely that expanded funding of the Dial -a -Ride program would ever be
substantial enough to meet the growing demand for door-to-door transportation
services by the elderly, disabled and general public.
6. Reductions in school funding of transportation programs for students is likely to result
in increased demand on the Dial -a -Ride program particularly for elementary school
age children outside the current busing zone.
7. Staff has included grant proposals for increased funding of the Dial -a -Ride program
through Proposition C; however, these were not approved int he current funding
cycle.
Council Study Session
ASA/MRC Evaluation of City Transit Services
September 30, 1992
Page 6
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council request the City Manager work with staff and the
Citizen Transportation Committee to develop policies and performance standards for each of;
our three transit services and report back to the City Council with a progress report in 90
days and final recommendations in 180 days.
ATTACHMENT
JK:rk:gmm
asamrc,trn
September 23,1992
Mr. Jeffrey Kolin
Deputy City Manager
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Suite 300
Santa Clarita, California 91355
Re: Santa Clarita Transit Study
Dear Mr. Kolin:
We have completed our review of the City's transit services and operations. This letter
summarizes the study's background, scope and objectives, and a summary of our major
findings and recommendations.
Background
Prior to the City of Santa Clarita's incorporation in 1987, Los Angeles County
Department of Public Works was responsible for and had contracted with the various
organizations for the delivery of transit and related services in the Santa Clarita Valley
area. Antelope Valley Transit (AVT) was contracted for the delivery of fixed -route bus
transportation systems throughout the valley; Mark IV Transit was under contract to
provide commuter services to downtown Los Angeles; and Santa Clarita Senior Center
was under contract to provide a Dial -A -Ride service for senior citizens throughout the
Valley. Revenues from fare boxes were supplemented by moneys received from the
County's portion of Proposition A (voter -approved initiative thta provides a 1/20 sales
tax to support transit) to cover the costs of providing transit services. In the years
following the City's incorporation, the County transferred responsibility for delivery of
these services to the City. As part of a region -wide reorganization of mass transit and
related services, and in conjunction with the Los Angeles County Transportation
Commission, the City initiated, reorganized; and re -configured transit services within
the City and the greater Santa Clarita Valley. In May 1991, the City entered into a
Master Lease with Option to Purchase Agreement for $2.1 million to acquire thirteen (24
passenger) buses to provide fixed route transit services. The bonds are anticipated to be
repaid over a ten-year period, commencing November 1, 1991.
127 North Madison Avenue, Suite #22 • Pasadena, CA 91101-1750
(818) 564-8700 • Fax: (818) 564-1116
In May 1991, the City, in conjunction with the Los Angeles County Transportation
Commission (LACTC) issued another $4.9 million in bonds to acquire eleven (40 seat)
buses for use in the commuter service and five (35 seat) buses to expand the fixed -route
service discussed above. This second series of bonds was to be repaid over a twelve
year period commencing July 1, 1992. The bonds would be repaid from farebox
revenues and the City's Proposition A funds. During the same period, the City initiated
a request for proposals to contract for Dial -A -Ride service. In October 1991, the City
awarded a five-year contract to ATE Transit Services, Long Beach, California. The
contract provided for the leasing of ten (15 passenger) vans to provide Dial -A -Ride
services for senior and handicapped passengers throughout the valley. In addition to
acquiring the Dial -A -Ride equipment, the City contracted with ATE Transit
management for delivery of its fixed route and commuter transit services and the
operation and maintenance of the City's previously -acquired twenty-nine buses.
As shown in Figure 1 below, in the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992, the City spent
$2,271,370 million to provide fixed route, Dial -A -Ride, and commuter transit services.
Based on the City's current expenditures, it is clear that farebox revenues and estimated
Proposition "A" moneys rebated to the City to support transit services will not be
sufficient to cover current and projected costs of delivering these services. Thus, as
Prop A
$2,024,990
Figure 1
1991/92 Transit Revenues
government, from
Proposition C funds, and from local granting agencies. Should these discretionary
grants fail to cover the shortfall, the City Council will need to consider the use of TDA
funds, which would otherwise be used for street and highway maintenance, to support
public transit services. Due to the City's limited resources and City management's
desire to maintain the maximum dollars available for delivery of basic City services and
needed capital improvements, the City's management has requested an outside
consultant's assistance to review the first six months of the vendor's performance
related to the delivery of contracted transit services and make recommendations, where
appropriate, to reduce costs and increase effectiveness.
Pomp A
$1,650,706
v
$361,000
Figure 2
1992/93 Transit Revenues
shown in Figure 2, in the
current and next fiscal
year, other moneys will
be needed to cover the
cost of providing transit
services. The City has
already applied for
discretionary grants
available from the
Federal Transit
Santa Clarita Transit 2 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
Scope and Objectives
The scope and objectives of our study are to analyze the current organization and
operation of the City's transit services (fixed route, .Dial -A -Ride, and commuter),
including vendor contract and performance related thereto, and make
recommendations to enhance its cost-effectiveness.
Methodology
In conducting our study, we reviewed the City's current contracts with ATE Transit,
collected and analyzed operational data for each service, including, but not limited to
vehicle and driver assigned under each of the contracts to determine hours of services,
vehicle and service miles, farebox revenue, cost of operations, number of passengers,
type of passengers, and, where appropriate, points of destination. In numerous
instances, the records maintained by the vendor contained mathematical errors and
inconsistencies. In each instance, we noted the change and used the vendor's revised
data for purpose of our analysis. In each instance, the vendor's revised data has been
reconciled to the invoices paid by the City for services rendered in accordance with the
contract.
Executive Summary Commuter
idt
The City anticipates spending $2,271,370 this year on
the delivery of its three transit services. Costs of the Fixed Route
services were covered by moneys received from e2%
Prop A and by farebox revenues. As shown in Dial -A -Ride
Figure 3, 52% of this overall cost is used to support 27% IP
Fixed Route transportation, 27% for Dial -A -Ride
services, and 21% for commuter transit services. By Figure 3
Transit System Share of Costs
contrast, cost recovery from farebox revenues ranged
from 2% for Dial -A -Ride services, to 8% for fixed route transit, to 62% for the commuter
service. The following is a detailed examination of the levels of service and cost trends
for these services.
Prop A and other
Figure 4
FerebeX
B%
Fixed Route Farebox Revenues
Fixed Route Transit
The City's fixed route transit service operates on specific
routes and schedules, picking up and dropping off
passengers at specified stops, throughout the Santa
Clarita Valley. Reasons for providing fixed route transit
services include linking residential areas with
employment; education, medical, recreation and
shopping areas and reducing automobile traffic along
densely traveled arteries. The City of Santa Clarita
currently provides six fixed route transit lines for the
Santa Clarita Transit 3 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
Greater Santa Clarita Valley. Since the City initiated the service, ridership has increased
by 20% while farebox revenues have remained about the same. These six lines carried
463,041 passengers during fiscal 1991/92 — or about 1,500 passengers per day — and
brought in farebox revenues of $122,125, or about 8% of the City's $1,508,900 total cost
of operations. As shown in Figure 4, the balance (92%) of the City's cost of providing
this service — $1,386,775, or about $3 per passenger trip — was paid from available
Proposition A funds.
]2,000
10,000
8,000
e
m
m
m 5,-100
3
a
4,000
2,000
City of Santa Clarita
Transit Division
Analysis of Passenger Iaads by Route
Auguet'91 September October Nwember December January 92 February March April'92
■ Route 10-15 O Raate 2045 M Route sows ®awte,10-45 O Route 50-65 O Hoare sono
Figure 5
As shown in Figures 5 and 6, of the six fixed route transit lines, Route 10/15 consistently
carried 30% of the fixed route system's passengers and provided farebox cost recovery
of 310 per passenger, or about 10% of the overall average cost per passenger trip. The
remaining five lines each carried 12%-16% of the passenger load and provided farebox
cost recovery of 21¢-280, or about 8% of the average system cost per passenger trip.
Route 10/15 appears to be carrying a disproportionate share of passengers, while the
other five lines, despite in some cases duplicating large segments of the route of line
10/15, carry about equal shares of the remaining passenger load and provide cost
recovery at a rate that varies with their share of passenger load. The large disparity
between the ridership on these lines and on line 10/15 suggests the need for the City to
reconsider the routing of its fixed route transit lines. The strong ridership and revenue
recovery for line 10/15 also demonstrates that an appropriately routed fixed route
transit line will be used by the public in Santa Clarita. Furthermore, our review of the
fixed route system noted a limited number of complaints were received over the eleven
month period. This reflects strong customer satisfaction with the quality and timeliness
of the service.
Santa Clarita Transit 4 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
City of Santa Clarity
Transit Division
Analysis of Revenue Per Passenger
E.60
$_00
September October November December January February March April 92
92
Route 10-15 l] haute 20.25 ® Route 30-35 M Route 4045 0 Route W -M (] Route 60/70
Figure 6
Recommendations:
1. The City should develop a statement of the mission, goals, and objectives of its
fixed route services and establish policies regarding system effectiveness (per capita
ridership, passengers per hour) and system efficiency (unit costs). Without a clear idea
of the reasons for providing the service or the desired levels of service and subsidy, it
will be difficult for the City to accomplish potential increases in cost-effectiveness.
2. The City should re-examine the routing of its fixed route transit lines, taking into
account current ridership levels, busiest. pick-up and drop-off points, driver down-time
between runs, and currently underserved populations. In order to carry out this
examination, the City will need stop -specific data, so that line profiles may be
accurately drawn. Current levels of data collection are sufficient to alert the City to
imbalances in line ridership and revenue recovery. However, it is not currently possible
to verify, for instance, that school passengers make up a large part of the difference in
passenger load between lines 10-15 and the remaining five lines. Nor is it possible to
determine whether that passenger load is evenly distributed between lines 10 and 15 or
along the two routes. As a result of this re-examination, the City could make informed
decisions about re-routing and rescheduling of the busiest and least used lines,
consolidation of less -used routes, elimination or reduction of least used routes, or other
options available to increase ridership.and thereby increase the -cost-effectiveness and
usefulness of this service. Care should be taken in reconfiguring the routes to provide a
transit link with the regional mall, set to open this month, and with Metrolink
commuter service, set to begin in October. Appropriate service to these two
destinations will not only increase ridership on the lines that travel to them, but also
increase local awareness of the fixed route transit service.
Santa Ctarita Transit 5 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
3. The City should compare the ridership and routes of its fixed route transit service
and its Dial -A -Ride service in order to ascertain where it may be cost-effective to
eliminate overlaps or duplication in service. In deciding which routes. or services to
eliminate, if any, the City will need to consider the roles and objectives of both the fixed
route and the Dial -A -Ride transit services.
4. The City should develop a marketing campaign to inform potential riders of
available services. Obviously, given this year's 20% increase in ridership with no
marketing campaign, there is a market in the area for fixed route public transit services.
Increased public awareness of the fixed route service will improve the likelihood that
this transit service can meet the objectives set by the City.
5. The City should develop policies by which decisions about new lines, new transit
services, or adjustments to lines, services, and fare structures may be made that will be
both cost-effective and in concert with the appropriate goals and objectives of each form
of transit service offered by the City.
Dial -A -Ride
Traditionally, Dial -A -Ride services are provided to those who are unable to use other
forms of transportation — private or public — whether because of age, physical handicap,
temporary medical conditions, or other barriers to alternate forms of transit. Dial -A -
Ride services are provided in a variety of ways,
including government-owned vans or buses, taxi or
mini -van services reimbursed by the supporting
government, and contractor provided vans or autos.
Santa Clarita currently provides Dial -A -Ride service
through contractor operation of a fleet of ten vans.
Service is available Monday through Saturday 6:00 a.m.
through 6:00 p.m. and through 10:30 p.m. Monday
Figure 7 through Friday. Service should be reserved 24 -hours
Dial -A -Ride Revenues in advance and standing orders for regularly
scheduled service may be requested. Service is
provided to the City by the vendor on an hourly, on -duty basis. The Dial -A -Ride
system currently provides free transportation to and from adult day care facilities and
charges 500 per ride for elderly or handicapped passengers and $1.00 for the general
public. As shown in Figure 7, the City anticipates spending $870,600 to provide Dial -A -
Ride services, of which 2% ($24,600) will be. raised from farebox revenues to offset
operating costs.
Santa Clarita Transit 6 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
City otSanta Clarita
Dial-A-ffide Service
Analysis of Expenditures
$90,000.......................... ..... ........................ ............................
$8D1000 .... .......................... ............ .......... i........... -_,I_
$70.000 /
$50.000 -----------------------------------_-•_ — j—-�-•_---_._ .
$40,= --------- •---_-----._.._..._..._..._---- -111 ----------
$10.000 ......... ................................. .-- •--:r'r•.�::%
—.i i l i i i l i
Navember'BO Zh dune 91 September 91 Deeember'81 March 92
MAEE".ditura . — x&Hzxpmaaurra _•—Canhined T.WEx,.ditu .
Figure 8
As shown in Figure 8, the City's cost for providing the Dial -A -Ride service increased
300% during the last eight months. The increase in operating costs is directly
attributable to the expanded service hours provided by the City beginning in November
1991, when the service was taken over from the senior center. The City expanded the
hours of operation for Dial -A -Ride and permitted general public ridership during
daytime hours in addition to those previously served – senior citizens and the
handicapped.
As shown in Figure 9, our analysis noted that while monthly ridership has fluctuated
significantly during this period, it has, on average, increased 7% from previous levels.
The increase in ridership appears to be evenly distributed between general public and
elderly & handicapped passengers. Furthermore, our analysis indicates 75% of the
riders are going to one of six points of destination. Night ridership continues to be
limited. Despite the expanded hours of service, the City has received numerous
complaints, particularly from senior citizens regarding reduction in the service levels
provided by the contractor. These complaints typically occur during specific times of
the day and can be addressed through improved scheduling and driver productivity.
Perhaps more important, the City's per passenger cost, which was $9.35 in November
1990, has nearly doubled to $18.08 during this eight month period. This dramatic
increase in cost of service is directly related to the increase in the hours of on -duty time
specified by the City and billed on an hourly basis by the vendor, regardless of the
number of persons requiring service. Our analysis of driver records indicated an
average of 60% of on -duty time was spent transporting passengers, with the remainder
spent awaiting assignment. It is clear that significant opportunities exist to reduce Dial -
A -Ride operating costs by increasing contractor productivity without reducing the level
of service previously enjoyed by the senior and handicapped passengers when the
service was operated by the Senior Center.
Santa Clarita Transit 7 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
e'O9 T
6,000
4,000
Z
3,000
2,000
1,000
City of Santa Clarita
Dial A Ride Service
Analysis of Passenger Growth
N..b.c1990 Feb.rr1991 Me,1991 AW1%1 Nm ber1991 Feb, -1992 Mry-1992
�Numbcalpwvpasin Peb.'YY.adoaddveleld efiN 9'mm�bc Rrida�Ym friP eLla
—e�Day
—.—Total
Figure 9
It is important to note that, despite the increase in cost of providing Dial -A -Ride service,
client satisfaction with the service provided has apparently decreased.
Recommendations:
1. The City should develop a statement of the mission, goals, and objectives for the
Dial -A -Ride service. This effort should include determining the size and nature of the
population to be served and identification of the specific transit needs of that
population. For instance, the City currently provides Dial -A -Ride services for LARC
Ranch residents, generally in groups of four or more. Currently, the Ranch is a mile
beyond where the closest fixed -route transit line ends, in an area without sidewalks.
The City may need to consider whether it would be more cost-effective to provide a
regularly scheduled shuttle or to extend one of its fixed route lines to pass closer to the
Ranch. The decision will need to be based, in part, on the degree to which the residents'
need for mainstream experience is the concern of the City's transit services. In this and
many other instances, it will be extremely difficult for the City to determine appropriate
service levels, costs, charges, and availability of Dial -A -Ride services without a clear
determination of its intended use.
2. The City should examine the routes and destinations of Dial -A -Ride riders to
determine where and whether the service overlaps or duplicates other, less costly
transit systems. While fixed route service may be inappropriate for the more fragile
riders served by the Dial -A -Ride system, there is a fairly large general population
ridership using Dial -A -Ride services.
Santa Clarita Transit 8 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
3. The City should investigate the effect of 24-hour advance and standing order
reservations for service on the costs of Dial -A -Ride services. Our analysis suggests a
fairly high rate of cancellation of standing order and advance requests. A habit of
passengers and care -givers booking Dial -A -Ride service well in advance, 'just in case;'
and then canceling may be having a significant impact on driver down-time and the
cost of providing Dial -A -Ride services.
4. The City should investigate alternative delivery systems for the needs served by
the Dial -A -Ride system. For example, a large segment of the Dial -A -Ride's ridership is
transported to and from Senior Nutrition services. It may be more cost-effective to
reimburse private. taxi or mini -van providers on a per ride or per mile basis than to
continue to maintain the current on -demand Dial -A -Ride system for them. The City
may also wish to consider decentralized nutrition services, to which it may be less
costly to transport passengers. Once the goals, objectives, and guiding policies of the
system have been determined, cost-effective alternatives will become easier to identify.
Commuter Services
The City currently provides transit services for
F..� commuters between Santa Clarita and downtown Los
`n Angeles. The service runs 5:20 - 8:45 a.m. and 3:30 -
8:00 p.m. Monday - Friday. The standard fare is
Figure 10 currently $2.25 per passenger and $1.00 for senior
Commuter Service Revenue citizens and the disabled: Monthly passes and other
reduced fares are available. As shown in Figure 8, the
City spent 191,923 on this service: farebox revenues totaled $118,151, representing a 62%
cost recovery.
As shown in Figure 11, the City has seen
significant fluctuation in monthly
commuter transit ridership. Our ^�
analysis indicates that ridership in June ,
1992 was 9% greaterthan in January and
61% greater than in the previous month. �.
This fluctuation in ridership has had a
negative impact on the vendor's ability
to adequately' meet the riders' needs, •^d AMI �^
thereby resulting in a number of Figure 11
complaints about the quality of service. Commuter service Passenger toad
The fluctuations in ridership have a
deleterious effect on farebox revenues which, despite an increase in ridership, are 14%
below that received at the start of the service. The causes of the fluctuations in ridership
are not immediately obvious, although the civil disturbances in Los Angeles during the
month of May, and the subsequent closing of many businesses for up to a week or more
in downtown Los Angeles, may have had a impact on regular ridership levels.
Santa Clarita Transit 9 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
The City currently recovers about 70% of the cost of operating the system (excluding
capital equipment). This is a fairly weak level of cost recovery for a commuter tranist
system compared with three other systems, also operated by ATE Transit Management,
Figure 12
Comparison of Commuter Line Farebox Recovery
as shown in Figure 12. This weak
cost recovery may, in fact, be a
reflection of the uneven ridership
and its effect on overall passenger
load and operating efficiency.
Figure 13 demonstrates the current
relationship between cost of
providing.. commuter transit
service, the current recovery from
fares and passes, and the amount
the City would need to collect to
reach an industry average of about
88% of the cost per passenger trip
(excluding capital expenditures).
Recommendations
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
I
___.. Hpni May June
t] FWebox Revenue ($) 088%Cwt Recovery ® Expense
Figure 13
Comparison of Revenues and Expenses
1. The City Council should
establish a statement of the mission, goals, and objectives for the commuter transit
Santa Clarita Transit 10 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.
system, including a goals for system effectiveness (consistent ridership levels) and
efficiency (farebox cost recovery).
2. The City should examine the possible causes of the fluctuations in demand for
commuter services, including the effect of the May civil disturbances, with an eye to
anticipating the changes and planning steps that can be taken to lessen the effect of
these changes on the cost of providing commuter services.
3. The City should determine the impact of the new Metrolink transit service (due
to start service in October) on its commuter service ridership before deciding on any
major changes in service levels or fares.
4. The City should consider raising fares on its commuter route, taking into account
the cause of passenger load fluctuations and competition from other transit services.
Santa Clarita Transit 11 Arroyo Seco Associates, Inc.