San Luis Obispo City Council
January 23, 2024

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
15 o Hardware: $3,000-$8,000 per vehicle
o Integration with other systems, including emergency alarm and CAD/AVL for login information tagging: $10,000 - $25,000, based on previous experience integrating.
• Camera system software:
o $50,000-$200,000 for implementation, software, documentation, training, and testing.
o $20,000-$100,000 per year for ongoing support (the higher end assumes hosted software and data storage)
This would put total costs for a project of this size in the range of $150,000 to $200,000 for all materials, software, and installation on 17 vehicles. This would not include ongoing storage costs.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
16 4 Technologies that Improve Riders’ User Experience
When community members ride on SLO Transit, they use technology to find out when the bus is coming, where they should wait, and to pay for their fare. As smartphone technology becomes increasingly ubiquitous, SLO Transit has an opportunity to invest in technology that reduces friction and increases convenience for bus riders. The user-facing technology improvements recommended in this section are vital to operating a convenient transit system, winning over the next generation of San Luis Obispo’s transit users, and seamlessly provide discounted passes and reduced costs for low-income riders and other eligible community members.

While SLO Transit riders would benefit from any improvements in payment, real-time passenger information, and other trip planning technologies, this study recommends pursuing user-facing technology improvements at a regional scale and in close collaboration with community partners and key stakeholders including SLORTA, SLOCOG, Cal Poly, and social services providers that manage income-verified programs in the community.

Table 3: Recommendations Related to Innovative Mobility Concepts # Recommendation Relevance
to SLO
Impact to
Ridership Timeframe Cost Priority
2 Pursue open loop payments through CalITP, in coordination with RTA High High Medium Medium HIGH 3 Enhance Real-Time Passenger
Information Medium High Short Medium HIGH
13 Establish a Mobility-as-a-Service Platform Medium Medium Long High LOW

4.1 Enhanced Real-Time Passenger Information Systems
Real-Time Passenger Information Systems (RTPI) provide customers with information about the nature and status of transportation services. RTPI systems and technology can vary between the information they provide and how they are presented. In recent years, there has been increased focus on providing schedule information in a standardized format (most commonly General Transit Feed Specification (GTFS) for integration with trip-planning applications, real-time vehicle location signage, and systems that relay service-related alerts to customers.

RTPI can also include enroute information, like on-board next stop announcements and predictions for stop arrival times. RTPI technology consists of a real-time data feed with prediction information, on-board audio and visual announcement components, stop dynamic message signs (DMS), customer self-service tools, interactive voice response systems that can be interfaced with scheduling systems and CAD/AVL to obtain static and real-time information.

According to SLO Transit, the current RTPI signage at SLO Transit Center and the trip planning application currently used by travelers don’t always reflect accurate times. This lack of correct information can reduce trust in the system, which hurts ridership restoration efforts. An

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
17 improved and accurate RTPI system at SLO Transit Center and more accurate times relayed through the app may improve customer experience, and in turn boost ridership efforts.

The improvement in the RTPI system will require an improvement in the entire real-time data pipeline, including:
• Data generation as part of scheduling and CAD/AVL system, including onboard announcements
• Real-time prediction information generation and dissemination • Real-time information display and presentation (through display signs, mobile apps, and other means)
Figure 3. An example of an RTPI sign at a Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Implementation Bus Stop

4.1.1 Cost
Costs for RTPI systems are contingent on the type of technology implemented on vehicles and at stops and transit centers. Costs associated with each system are as follows:
• On-Board Announcements:
o Hardware: $1,000-$3,000 per vehicle
o Creation of announcement database with geo-triggers $30,000 - $50,000 • CAD/AVL System: covered in Section 3.1.1.
• Real-time prediction and dissemination system: $30,000 – 60,000 annually (Software as a Service, subscription-based business model).
• LED/LCD wayside signage: $5,000 - $20,000 per location (dependent on the type of signage, and needs for power and communications)
• E-paper wayside signage: $2,000 - $4,000

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
18 This would put total costs for a project of this size in the range of $30,000 to $100,000 for backend prediction generations, plus some additional cost for stop-level predictions. For budgeting purposes, SLO Transit could allocate $100,000 for total real-time passenger information improvements.

4.2 Open Loop Payments
Open Payments refer to the use of finance sector cards or mobile payment apps that may be used for payment of goods and services, offering more payment modes for customers. Open payments can help reduce cash handling expenses and expensive ticket vending machines (TVMs). The majority of the fare vendors are developing this functionality, and the system can be integrated with mobile wallets which help users integrate pay directly through their Apple or Google wallets.

While closed-loop payments utilizing tap cards (currently used by SLO Transit) can still play a big role in introducing and maintaining incentives for regular riders, open loop payments can facilitate ease of ridership particularly for visitors or infrequent users of the system. In previous discussions, SLO Transit staff expressed strong interest in allowing customers to pay for transit services with direct use of credit cards to make ridership easier. This recommendation also has potential to increase ridership by attracting new riders who may not have a transit card or app and do not wish to use one.

4.2.1 Cost
Like Cal-ITP and Clipper 2.0 projects in California, open loop payment projects are often pursued at a state or regional level. The effort would require collaboration with financial vendors and other stakeholders, but this would allow for pooling of resources in what can be a cost-intensive endeavor, sometimes in the multiple millions of dollars. For an agency of SLO Transit’s size, this collaborative approach would be recommended for implementing an openloop payment system.

4.3 MaaS Platform
Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) refers to the integration of various transportation services into a single, comprehensive, and on-demand mobility application. MaaS offers users the value of accessing mobility applications through one single application and payment channel (instead of multiple ticketing and payment operations). MaaS applications can host a diverse menu of transport options, including (but not limited to) public transport options, taxi and ridesharing services, and active transportation options such as bikeshare, e-scooter share and walking directions or a combination thereof when programs are established at SLO Transit. The functions of a MaaS application may range, but typical functionality includes trip discovery, trip planning, and trip payment options.

There are five different levels of MaaS, as depicted in Figure 4. While there have been several implementations of MaaS in recent years, most agencies have yet to realize the full potential of a Level 4 Integrated Application. Most United States-based examples are Level 0 or 1 MaaS systems, with a couple examples of Level 2 and 3 deployments that the industry hopes to progress to in the near future.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
19 Figure 4: Levels of MaaS
As SLO Transit pursues its bikeshare efforts and potentially adds other services like microtransit, a MaaS platform that can integrate those options and allow for booking and payment in one place becomes particularly relevant. This idea is in line with goals expressed in the Active Transportation Plan which discusses the need for a streamlined process for riders using bikeshare, carshare, and transit in the future. A MaaS platform could also allow for easier disbursement of transit passes and application of certain discounts, or a combined transportation ‘wallet’ which allows users to spend money on a variety of services from one account.

Because MaaS platforms thrive when a diverse set of transportation modes are presented, the recommendation is that SLO Transit first identify and expand what those modes are, and then establish and incorporate them into one application. This could also be pursued as a regional effort incorporating services and improving planning, payment, and booking for not just SLO Transit but also RTA and others. Overall, MaaS presents an opportunity to gain new riders who may more easily compare and use a variety of transit modes when presented in a single interface, but this is a long-term solution dependent on the success of individual services and not a high priority need as identified in the needs assessment.

4.3.1 Cost
Costs for MaaS platforms vary depending on the number of modes, contract details with 3rd party platforms and the level of integration. Contract costs may include development costs, software integration fees, ticketing fees, transaction fees, and other operational costs.

Depending on the model used, costs can range from $100,000 into the millions depending on the scale of the project. Grant funding is typically pursued to assist with this effort.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
20 5 Fare Program Updates to Increase Transit Accessibility This category of recommendations focuses on pre-negotiated fares and other programs that make it cheaper and easier for certain users to take the bus. There are dozens of ways to create fare programs to increase ridership and provide affordable fares. This study recommends improvements to fare programs for students, seniors and low-income riders that would extend fare-free periods and better support community members who depend on the bus to get around. It also recognizes an opportunity to explore additional institutional partnerships with local businesses and developers, and to create a program that makes it easier for organizations and associations to buy bulk bus passes for their members.

Lastly, this study recommends changes to SLO Transit’s existing Downtown Access Program to reduce program enrollment burdens and increase benefits. It is important to note however, that fare program updates and new offerings are only as successful as the marketing and communications campaigns that spread the word in the community. Table 5 provides more information on those programs along with their strengths and limitations.

Table 4: Recommendations Related to Fare Policies and Programs # Recommendation Relevance
to SLO
Impact to
Ridership Timeframe Cost Priority
6 Implement Fare Changes for
Students, Seniors, and LowIncome RidersHigh High Short Low HIGH 12 Explore Institutional
Partnerships Medium High Medium Low MEDIUM
5 Expand Downtown Access
Program High Medium Short Low HIGH
Table 5: SLO Transit Fare Programs

NAME DESCRIPTION ELIGIBILITY STRENGTHS LIMITATIONS
Downtown
Access Pass
(DAP)
A physical or mobile
bus pass that is free
for employees in
downtown
To be used for
commute purposes to
and from downtown
Currently used by
about 30 people
Employees in the
Downtown SLO
Parking District
Renewed Annually
Ridership tracked
by physical/digital
taps
Reduces demand
for parking by
encouraging
downtown
employees to take
the bus
Available as both a
physical card and
through the Token
Transit App
Limited to
employees who
work in downtown
only
Requires renewal
efforts by the rider
about every three
months

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
21 Partnership
with Cal Poly
TAPS
Cal Poly students,
faculty, and staff ride
free
Must have valid Cal
Poly ID
Cal Poly affiliates
make up ∼58% of
annual passenger
trips
Is funded by
parking citation
revenue from the
Cal Poly
Excludes other
schools in and near
the city
There are also a variety of rider categories that qualify for free or reduced fare depending on the circumstances. Those category-based policies are outlined in Table 6.

Table 6: SLO Transit Fare Categories

NAME DESCRIPTION ELIGIBILITY STRENGTHS LIMITATIONS
Summer
Youth Ride
Free
A regional program
that allows K-12
students to ride for
free during the
summer months by
using their student
ID as verification
Lasts from Mid-June to
Late August
Must be in grades K-12
with a student ID
Youth make up 4.8% of
population
Applies to all transit
agencies in the region
Is for summer
only and does
not provide
free service
for students
during the
school year
Senior and
Disabled Card
“VIP” riders 80+
years old ride free
A physical ID card
that allows riders to
purchase the
discount single-ride
and multiday passes
on SLO Transit
Disabled riders with
verification
Riders 65-79 Years Old
Legal residents of San
Luis Obispo
Elderly population
makes up ∼5.2% of
population and disabled
makes up ∼6.4%
Provides free or
discounted travel to all
riders 65+ years old and
riders with disabilities
Restricted to
legal City
residents
Requires
application
processes
and
identification
While these programs and policies go a long way toward providing affordable rides and incentivizing transit ridership, there are several steps SLO Transit could take to further bolster incentives and expand policies to best recruit and maintain riders.

5.1 Fare Changes for Student, Senior, and Low-Income Riders Providing accessible fare options can help riders get to destinations, shorten boarding times, and welcome new riders to the transit system. The suggestions below expand on the current accessible fare programs offered at SLO Transit for student, senior, and low-income riders.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
22 5.1.1 Fare-Free Periods
Fare-free periods are periods in which SLO Transit offers free fares for riders. Currently, SLO offers Cal-Poly students and K-12 students free fares during the summer by presenting their student IDs to drivers.

To increase fare-free periods, it is recommended that SLO Transit implements the following suggestions:
o Extend student free period beyond summer or to include holidays o Extend the program to allow Seniors access to free rides for part of the year

5.1.2 Fare-Free Categories
Fare-free categories are a type of fare program where a specific rider demographic or fare category does not need to pay for fares at any time. These programs are typically supported by either an eligibility verification program, fare collection technology, or in the simplest instances, by simply requiring operators to visually verify a known government agency issued ID.

To expand fare-free categories it is recommended that SLO Transit implement the following:
• Low-Income Rider Pilot Program. This would allow riders who qualify for federally funded social welfare programs, for example, to receive discounted rides. The recommendation would involve starting this as a 12-month pilot program. • Senior/Disabled and VIP program. The discounts and pass types can be the same as Senior/Disabled as well, but further market and rider research is recommended before confirming program eligibility and discounts.

5.2 Institutional Program Recommendations
Institutional Pass Programs are institutional affiliate-oriented fare programs that provide discounted or free travel for affiliates of participating organizations. Institutional programs are typically supported by a designated point of contact from each institution who serves as a coordinator and point of contact between the transit agency and employees.

The organizations benefit by paying an upfront cost to give their employees free or subsidized transit for the decided duration of time. The transit agencies benefit by receiving program fees that are independent from the affiliate use, or sometimes tied to the total population of the affiliates within the institution, making an institutional program a reliable source of funding.

In this model, the eligibility criteria are set by the transit agency and the institutional partner through program policies:
• Participants – all affiliates or defined subsets (e.g., off-campus students only) • Services – full system or specific routes
The program can be funded by participating organizations through:
• Standard fee schedule (e.g., price per participant, number of participants) • Negotiated funding agreements (specific to one organization)

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
23 • Price per trip/transaction
In the cases where programs are tied to fare transactions or trips by affiliates, the agencies are then required to implement technology to account for those fare transactions separately from other transactions. Institutional pass programs are typically supported by fare collection technology, with riders typically required to validate their affiliation through ID cards, affiliated smart cards, or more recently, mobile app-based fare media.

Below are core recommendations for expanding the current institutional programs at SLO Transit:
• Expand Cal Poly SLO Ridership program to other organizations served by SLO Transit. A few partnerships that could be explored include:
o Cuesta College
o County of San Luis Obispo Government
o Various Unified School Districts
o Surrounding motels and hotels
▪ Hotel San Luis Obispo
▪ Garden Street Inn
▪ SLO Brew Lofts
▪ Granada Hotel & Bistro
▪ Hostel Obispo
• Simplify process for bulk bus passes, expanding this option beyond just developers.

5.3 Downtown Access Passes
The Downtown Access Pass is a physical or electronic bus pass that can be used by employees in downtown San Luis Obispo to ride the bus for free. It is intended to encourage bus commutes to and from downtown and is currently used by about 30 people. All employees that work in the Downtown SLO Parking District are eligible for the program, however, utilization of this program is relatively low. There are two ways SLO Transit could consider expanding the program to boost ridership.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
24 Figure 5: Downtown Access Pass Program Boundaries

5.3.1 Geographic Expansion
The eligibility area for the Downtown Access program was designed to help alleviate the demand for parking in the downtown area while providing a transit benefit to its employees.

There may be additional areas that would benefit from similar programs.

Key areas of expansion are districts that are already relatively well served by existing transit routes and have existing businesses and population. Any areas with new housing developments, notably mixed-use developments are also recommended places to consider.

Looking at SLO Transits current service, the following areas are:
o The Historic Railroad District
o South Higuera St. near SLO Public Market
o Mill Street Historic District
o Old Town Historic District

5.3.2 Policy Changes
Policy changes will also play a large part in expanding the program. The project team recommends SLO Transit transform Downtown into a fare-free boarding zone for all riders.

This policy benefits riders who are both leaving downtown and traveling with the downtown fare free zone and further encourages transit use as the primary mode of transportation downtown. Further analysis to farebox ratio should be incorporated in making this decision, but initial review indicates farebox revenue impacts would be minimal for a small enough boarding and alighting area.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
25 Another recommendation would be to improve the DAP enrollment and reenrollment process.

Currently, eligibility expires after 90 days, and users must email SLO Transit with identification to have their pass extended. Then they must send an annual renewal email as well. Eliminating the 90-day reverification requirement and making this simply an annual renewal process could facilitate participation and simplify program administration. Instead of email, it is also recommended that users can enroll online by completing an easy to access form, which could be made available by the City through the Laserfiche platform. Another possibility to improve the process would be to provide reloadable smartcards limited to downtown access as the pass that riders receive.

The project team also recommends that the program be expanded to include regional services such as RTA as well. While additional coordination may be required, this would further bolster enrollment and could attract more people to transit.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
26 6 Bus Shelter and Street Improvements for Rider Safety and Comfort
Bus stops are a ubiquitous symbol of transit systems that may influence perception of the system. For riders, a bus stop can provide informational value, in addition to comfort and security while waiting for a bus. These features can vary widely from stop to stop and include amenities ranging from information systems that can provide riders with arrival estimates, to benches and coverings for comfortability. It is critical for bus stops to reinforce comfortability and safety to maintain and attract riders. Security for transit riders will be attained through updating and thoroughly maintaining bus stop amenities. Accessibility will be increased through the interrelation of physical improvements, enhanced service, and updated technology.

Furthermore, bus stops have been a focus for many transit agencies’ accessibility improvements, after the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1992. Outcomes from studies have also shown that increased levels of amenities at bus stops can make elderly and disabled riders comfortable with using transit systems and that appropriate amenities can increase overall appeal. This study recommends three types of bus stop enhancements to improve rider experiences and outcomes.

Table 7: Recommendations Related to Bus Stop Enhancements # Recommendation Relevance
to SLO
Impact to
Ridership Timeframe Cost Priority
12 Install Lighting,
Shelters, and Bike
Parking at Applicable
Bus Stops
Medium Medium Medium Medium MEDIUM
14 Investigate and
Establish Mobility
Hubs
Medium Medium Medium High LOW
17 Add Bus Bulb-outs
Downtown Medium Low Long Medium LOW

6.1 Update Bus Stop Amenity Inventory
SLO Transit currently operates 165 bus stops, outfitted with varying amenities. While some stops feature modern and up to date technology and design, much of the infrastructure that supports SLO Transit is aged and is nearing the end of its lifespan.

As shown in Figure 6, the most feature-rich amenities at bus stops are located at the downtown transit center. Here, riders can find four deluxe shelters with seating, route maps, real-time arrival information and refuse bins. The road features a concrete pad for bus stops, and sawtooth bays to accommodate boarding for multiple routes.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
27 Figure 6: Downtown SLO Transit Center
By contrast, Figure 7 is representative of most other SLO Transit stops, that have significantly fewer amenities. Most stops feature static bus arrival information in the form of printed schedules, smaller waiting areas and more outdated shelters. Others have just a route and destination indicator sign with no seating, shelter, or refuse bins.

Figure 7: Orcutt at Laurel Bus Stop
However, there needs to be a complete inventory of all bus stops, their associated amenities, and ridership at each stop to best determine priority locations for improvements. One way to assess priority locations is by utilizing stop level ridership data. Simply put, the more a bus stop is used, the more riders it serves and the more it may benefit from upgrades and improvements.

The process for identifying these high ridership stops generally includes sorting Automated Passenger Counter (APC) stop-level data from highest to lowest. If APC data is unavailable or unreliable, fare collection information can also be used to evaluate boardings and lightings at each stop. Neither APC nor fare data was reliable enough or available for this study. Therefore, performing a complete bus stop amenity inventory and ridership analysis to properly assess

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
28 the benefits to each stop is recommended. This process would not yield any direct benefits to ridership but would help determine appropriate improvements discussed in subsequent sections.

6.1.1 Costs
A full bus stop amenity inventory and analysis could cost around $25,000 which would likely include inventory as well as location specific recommendations based on ridership data.

6.2 Lighting Improvements
Adequate lighting is an important component to safety and security at bus stops. When existing streetlights don’t provide adequate lighting, proper lighting should be provided to ensure the safety and security of all transit riders. Bus stops should also be visible from nearby buildings, roads, near crosswalks and well-lit so transit riders and bus operators are able to locate the stop. Lighting can be affixed within bus stop shelters or on bus sign poles. Lighting can often leverage solar power for operation.

Lighting improvements was expressed as a high priority for SLO Transit, and identifying appropriate locations is contingent on the analysis mentioned in Section 6.1.

6.2.1 Costs
Costs for lighting improvements are contingent on the complexity of installation, wattage and other factors. Prices range between $1,000 to $15,000.

6.3 Shelter Improvements
Shelters or shade coverings at bus stops provide riders with increased comfort regardless of the time of the year. Shelters can reduce the impact of winds and provide relief for rain or intense sunshine. Shelters can also house a variety of amenities for riders that can improve satisfaction with wait times, improve safety perceptions, and provide information systems.

Through previous discussion, adequate shade and shelter improvements were listed as high priority items from SLO Transit engineering team. After the full inventory described in Section

6.1 is complete, priority can be placed on making improvements to shelter at locations with the highest ridership without shelter.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
29 Figure 8: South at Parker (E) Bus Stop

6.3.1 Cost and Implementation
Cost of shelters may vary based on the complexity of their design, but generally have a base cost of at least $4,0001. As a general rule, transit shelters are recommended at all stops with more than 30 riders per day. In addition, shelters should be considered at locations that are exposed to weather, at transfer points or at stops with relatively high use by seniors and children. Implementation of shelter improvements is contingent on the analysis mentioned in Section 6.1.

6.4 Bike Parking
Supplying adequate bike parking at bus stops and transit centers can supplement transit ridership by enhancing access to stop-adjacent destinations and boosting intermodal connectivity. Often, this takes the shape of bike corrals or dedicated bike lockers near bus shelters. Most of the bike racks offered in SLO are like those shown in Figure 9, which offer on-street parking for 2-3 bicycles on the sidewalk.
1 Source: Metro Transit https://www.greatermadisonmpo.org/planning/documents/BusStopAmenitiesStudy.pdf

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
30 Figure 9: Bike racks at Chorro and Monterey St
Selection of the type of bike parking an agency offers is contingent on the volume of bike traffic on a given road, weather, and available space. This ranges from on-street bike parking (e.g., corrals or U-rack clusters) to on-demand parking options such as Bike Link lockers. On-street bike racks should be located close to, without being directly in front of entrances of high demand locations for bicyclists and can take the place of one to two vehicle parking spaces where bicycle parking demand is high and sidewalk space is constrained. These corrals typically provide parking for 6 bikes (per single parking space) or 18 bikes for two 10’ parking spaces.

For more long-term parking options, some agencies or organizations install dedicated bike lockers that provide bicyclists with a secure bike locker that keeps the bike clean, dry, and ready to ride any time of the year. These lockers typically have a higher installation cost and are offered to bicyclists at an hourly or monthly rate. CalPoly offers this service at 14 locations across the university’s campus (See Figure 10).

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
31 Figure 10: CalPoly Bike Lockers Located on Village Dr.

6.4.1 Costs
Costs for bike racks and lockers are contingent on the type of infrastructure chosen, and how many bicycles can park at the given location. Cost estimates can be found below:
• Single U-style bike rack (1-2 bicycles): $125-150 per rack • Contemporary U-style bike corral (6-8 bicycles): $450-800 per corral • Bike lockers (1 bike per locker): ~$2000 per locker.

Single-occupancy vehicle trips dominate transportation mode splits in most cities, including San Luis Obispo. To reduce traffic and achieve more sustainable outcomes, a much larger percentage of people taking transit trips alongside other modes will be necessary. One way to achieve that increase in transit share is to incentivize public transit use by implementing initiatives to provide strategic advantages to transit operations in the transportation network. These transit priority strategies allow transit to be more competitive on travel times, reliability, comfort, and convenience as compared to other vehicles.

Some examples of transit priority measures include bus-only lanes, signal priority for transit vehicles, or other physical or regulatory modifications that give public transit priority over other vehicles.

Studies of various deployments have shown that the cities with clear priority policies and strategic implementation plans have had the most successful deployments. It is critical to identify individual initiatives within the larger deployment and assign priority levels according to the city’s predefined criteria such as budget, resource usage, and schedule.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
32 Initial projects are often selected based on their ability to demonstrate the benefits of the measures so that they can serve as benchmarks for future implementations. It can also help in placing standards for organizing planning work as well as drawing up a guidebook for including external and internal stakeholders who play an important role in the overall success of the project.

6.5 Mobility Hubs
Mobility hubs are places in communities that bring together services such as public transit, bikeshare, carshare and other options in one place to provide first-last mile solutions without use of a private vehicle. Mobility hubs are typically located where transit services already come together, or in communities and locations where transportation is needed the most to support transit connectivity and ridership as well as improved overall mobility for the region.

Mobility choices are constantly evolving and features of a mobility hub are tailored to the unique needs of an individual community. When executed properly, they not only cater to the transportation needs of today, but those of the future as well. Implementing one or more mobility hubs in San Luis Obispo would require follow-up work to identify specific locations most beneficial to SLO Transit. One location of interest would be SLO Transit Center given the existing confluence of fixed-route service. Figure 11 shows an example mobility hub mock up from San Diego with 12 different services and amenities, including bikeshare, package delivery, EV charging and more.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
33 Figure 11: Mobility Hub Example (Source: SANDAG)

6.5.1 Costs
Funding for mobility hub projects depends on the types of amenities provided, location of the hub, and more. Funding varies from traditional government grants and dedicated revenue streams to more cooperative implementation partnerships. In general, project costs range between $250,000 - $2 million for complete hubs, including planning, design, construction, and marketing. One approach the City could take is testing a few low-cost amenities at a central location and testing the viability of the hub concept, without committing to resources that cannot be later removed or altered. Additional investment could then be applied to highperforming mobility hub locations.

6.6 Bus Bulb Outs
Bus bulb-outs are curb extensions that are placed in line with curb-side parking areas and help passengers board and alight in travel lane itself. This helps eliminate the need for buses to pull in and out of travel lanes and reduces the overall dwell time buses incur from it, in-turn making transit service faster and more and reliable. Bus bulb-outs also provide spaces for essential amenities like wayfinding maps, bio-swells, transit shelters, and others, that plays an important role in enhancing the overall experience of the transit user.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
34 While the length and width of the extensions are allowed to vary somewhat based on street geometry, vehicle types, and urban context, the length should be about two buses long, especially at far side stops and routes with frequent service, so that buses do not block the intersection while queuing up. The width should be enough to deploy a wheelchair accessible lift onto the bulb. Another important factor is to keep in mind at the design stage is to include cut throughs for easy movement of bikes, so that it doesn’t block a bike lane, if present on the approach.

Figure 12: Bus Bulb Outs (Source: NACTO)

6.6.1 Costs
The price range for bus bulbs can range between $15,000 and $70,000 per bulb and depends on variables such as drainage needs, utility relocation, construction materials and patron amenities2.
2 PedSafe http://www.pedbikesafe.org/pedsafe/countermeasures_detail.cfm?CM_NUM=16

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
35 7 Service Enhancements
Service enhancements are instrumental to improving current rider experiences and to attracting future riders. Community stakeholders unanimously agree that “enhanced service on fixed routes” is the number one recommendation that is capable of increasing SLO Transit ridership. Specifically, focused efforts on decreasing headways on priority routes has been underscored as a preferred method to streamline and develop confidence towards transit within riders.

In addition, there are several newer mobility concepts that may help improve a city or region’s transportation ecosystem. These concepts focus on services and mobility improvements beyond traditional fixed-route and on-demand service that transit agencies are typically expected to provide. When implemented, these concepts can help to provide a more holistic and complete approach to transportation which may help reduce car-dependence and emissions in line with San Luis Obispo’s mode split objectives and carbon neutrality goals.

Table 8: Recommendations Related to Service Enhancements # Recommendation Relevance
to SLO
Impact to
Ridership Timeframe Cost Priority
1 Enhance Service on
Fixed Routes High High Medium High HIGH
9 Pursue Micro-Transit
Mobility Services Medium High Long Medium MEDIUM
11 Launch a Bikeshare
Program Medium Low Short Low MEDIUM
15 Implement Carshare
Program Medium Low Medium Medium LOW
16 Implement a Transit
Signal Priority Strategy Low Low Medium High LOW

7.1 Enhanced Service on Fixed Routes
One of the most critical needs identified by SLO Transit and stakeholders was the need to improve existing fixed-route bus service. While several strategies in this study relate to that effort (i.e., improving onboard technology, investing in transit-friendly infrastructure), this section refers primarily to planning strategies that can be utilized to facilitate more frequent service. Improving frequency is one of the most direct ways of transporting more riders and improving evaluations of the system.

According to the most recent Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), SLO Transit averages 3,615 daily boardings on weekdays, and roughly 950-1,200 boardings on weekends. Per the National Association of City Transportation Officials’ (NACTO) categorizations, that weekday ridership number falls under ‘moderate volume’, which generally warrants headways between 10 and 15 minutes.3 Even along SLO Transit’s highest ridership routes (routes 3 and 4, which 3 NACTO https://nacto.org/publication/transit-street-design-guide/introduction/service-context/transit-frequency-volume/

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
36 constitute roughly half of all SLO service) headways are occurring at 30-minute intervals, or two buses per hour. As updates to the SRTP are made, the City should consider improving frequency along these two routes on weekdays, particularly during the academic year, to accommodate more passengers and improve service performance. If any other routes or periods of time are determined to be moderate or high demand through the course of the City’s SRTP update, those routes and periods should also be considered for frequency improvements. Consideration of increased service frequency (or headways) needs to consider passenger transfer behavior and timed or pulse transfer policy.

Given the stated priority of these improvements, the project team recommends these modifications be explored further while updating the SRTP over the next year, and implemented shortly thereafter (within two years), acknowledging that some improvements may take longer to implement than others.

There are several strategies to improve fixed-route service frequency. Those that are particularly relevant to the SLO operating environment are:

1. Optimizing Existing Routes: Optimizing routes can reduce wait times by better aligning service with peak demand and can further reduce travel times by improving transfers between routes. It can also bolster reliability by ensuring proper buffer times to accommodate delays, resulting in more predictable and efficient service. This strategy may involve modifications to existing routes or changes to schedules to accommodate specific stops more frequently. Implementation of schedule and route changes is often done in phases, to allow for continuous monitoring and fine-tuning to ensure the schedules meet passenger needs and sufficiently reduce wait times. It's critical that any such changes be communicated to the public in advance.

2. Establishing Express Bus Services: Express buses offer quicker, skip-stop service along predetermined routes. Express service can often drastically reduce travel times and are particularly useful if there are specific origins and destinations with high demand that are not sufficiently served by current routes. For example, express routes could be explored as a faster service to get downtown. This can also work to promote economic development by providing quicker access to business districts, job centers, and shopping areas.

3. Increasing Available Fleet and Drivers: Putting more buses on the road, especially during peak periods, is one of the most direct ways to decrease headways. While this does come with cost and hiring drivers is still difficult for many agencies like SLO Transit at this time, adding to this capacity allows for more buses to be dispatched and can drastically improve frequency. It can also serve as a reliability backstop by providing maintaining service when a bus faces mechanical problems or delays.

4. Expanding Service Operating Hours: Extending service hours can help ensure passengers are able to rely on transit throughout the day and night. This strategy should be implemented only if data suggests there is a demand for trips outside of current operating hours. However, such changes were made in the 2016 SRTP and will likely be valuable to revisit again. This expansion does not affect the time between buses but rather overall frequency of buses visiting a given stop and improves transit accessibility. It can be particularly useful for those working irregular hours. This strategy also affects the schedule optimization process outlined above.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
37 Evaluating where and when to make these changes will require several data sources that should be used when updating the SRTP. These include:
• Ridership Data: To understand passenger demand and ridership patterns, including transfers.
• Historical Performance Data: To assess on-time performance, delays, and regular service interruptions.
• Stop Utilization Data: Information about the number of passengers boarding and alighting at each stop, helping to identify high demand stops and areas. • Travel Time Data: Data on the time it takes for buses to travel between stops, helping to pinpoint areas with significant delays.
• Traffic Data: Information including traffic congestion, road conditions, and infrastructure that might affect bus service speeds.
• Demographic Data: Demographic information about the areas surrounding stops and routes, which can provide insights into the potential demand for transit service. • Origin-Destination Data: To determine passenger travel patterns and the need for express routes.

Once the data has been analyzed and specific implementations of these strategies has been finalized, the City should also ensure that key performance indicators related to frequency of service are up to date and able to track performance by any given time interval. Important KPIs for evaluating frequency include:
• Ridership: Has the number of passengers changed by route or route segment? • Headways: How frequently are buses operating along a given route in one hour? Is this number below the targeted threshold (i.e., 15 minutes)? • Average Wait Time: How long are passengers waiting for a vehicle when they arrive at a stop?
• Customer satisfaction: How happy are customers with bus frequencies? Can they rely on fixed-route transit to get them where they need to go in a timely manner? Are transfer times coordinated amongst route schedules?
Tracking these variables should allow the City to report on the impact of frequency improvements and identify specific areas in which further improvement may be warranted. Further, it is important to consider the impact on transportation equity and accessibility for vulnerable or underserved populations - evaluate whether increased headways disproportionately affect certain communities.

7.1.1 Costs
The cost of implementing any frequency improvements can be quite high. While some minor modifications to schedules and routes may be relatively inexpensive, hiring additional drivers, implementing express bus service, and expanding operating hours can add hundreds of thousands of dollars in operating costs. New buses, particularly electric buses, are typically in the range of one million dollars as well. Although these costs are high, research shows that the

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
38 benefits of improved frequency can outweigh the costs by multiple fold.4 Funding sources to assist with these costs are discussed further in section 8.2.

7.2 Pursue Microtransit Mobility Services
In addition to traditional fixed-route service improvements, there are several opportunities to implement on-demand mobility or fixed-route microtransit that may help supplement current service and further expand ridership. This section outlines a step-by-step approach to determining what specific alternative mobility transit solution would be most appropriate for SLO Transit’s needs and the impacts on cost and ridership.

7.2.1 Identifying Zones or Market Segments of Focus
This is the first step in the process for determining if alternative service is necessary and feasible is establishing zones or market segments to focus on. This will provide a better understanding of what locations and geographic span is being considered for something like microtransit service, and what riders that are not currently being served by fixed route would be served by new modes. This is important before using the framework described below to select an alternative/supplemental service solution.

7.2.2 Using the Ridership and Cost Assessment Model
A Cost and Ridership Estimation Model was developed to assist the City in the planning and deployment of, or modifications to, mobility service scenarios in the future. The model can be found as an attachment.

Once zones or market segments have been established as areas of focus, the ridership and cost assessment tool can be used to evaluate the impacts of each proposed alternative service model to see what would be most beneficial to SLO Transit. Specific variables of the model are pre-filled with industry-informed values but can be modified by any user to calculate costs and ridership per any defined set of criteria.

It is recommended that SLO Transit follow this process for evaluating and selecting alternative transit services to complement fixed-route service and further expand mobility offerings.

7.3 Implement Bikeshare Program
Bike sharing is one example of micromobility in action. Typically, micromobility refers to small, lightweight vehicles used by one person to travel distances usually less than 10 miles.

Typically, travel using these modes does not exceed roughly 15 MPH. While some personal devices like skateboards, roller skates, and hoverboards may fall under the category of micromobility, this category largely consists of bikes, e-bikes, and e-scooters.

Many cities offer access to shared bikes as part of a micromobility program. These programs can vary widely in size and structure as well as the types of devices provided. While some 4 Human Transit https://humantransit.org/basics/the-transit-ridership-recipe

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
39 cities offer shared bikes with fixed docking locations around the city, others offer bikes that are “dockless” and can be parked anywhere (though even in these cases, parking regulations such as “lock-to” requirements can be implemented). Cities typically partner with third-party companies for the provision, deployment, and maintenance of micromobility devices.

Monitoring of the program can either be done by reporting and coordination between cities and companies or through other third-party software monitoring and tracking tools.

Bikeshare programs can play a major role in addressing first-last mile transit concerns and offer relatively affordable rides to the general public for trips within a predefined geographic area. Bikeshare is particularly appealing for densely populated communities where residents and visitors can travel to several key destinations within a relatively short trip.

Bikeshare has been of particular interest to the San Luis Obispo community for some time. As outlined in the City’s Active Transportation Plan, the City has already been engaged in a pilot bikeshare program in partnership with Cal Poly and is interested in expanding the program to a wider area. The City has been working to identify potential locations for future bikeshare stations in pursuit of this effort.

7.3.1 Costs
Costs to implement a city-managed bikeshare program typically range from $3,000 to $5,000 per bike. These costs include the bike itself but also docking stations, rental kiosks, and other minor capital costs. For programs delivered by third-parties, particularly used in dockless bike scenarios, contracts can be cheaper or of no cost to the city and require less direct oversight by staff. SLO Transit is most interested in pursuing a third-party provided docked bikeshare system at no cost to the City.

7.4 Implement Carshare Program
Carsharing is a type of car-rental service in which passengers can rent vehicles for hours or days at a time. This is in contrast to traditional car-rental services which charge by the day and typically only allow for pickup at brick-and-mortar locations. Carsharing is often provided under two models: peer-to-peer rentals and company-based rentals. Peer-to-peer rentals (like Turo) allow individual car owners to lease their vehicle to others looking to borrow a car for a hours or days at a time. Company-based rentals involve a company (like ZipCar) owning vehicles and often renting parking spaces from a city, and then renting those vehicles to individuals for either hours or days.

Carsharing aims to provide additional flexibility in travel to those who may not own a car. Like ridesharing (e.g., Uber, Lyft) it can allow people to take trips otherwise inaccessible without a vehicle. In addition to affordability and convenience, carsharing can help alleviate emissions by reducing reliance of personal vehicles. Often, carsharing services include both app-based and web-based interfaces for reserving, booking, and paying for rentals.

For SLO Transit, carsharing will likely not have a large impact on ridership. However, it does support car light and car free lifestyles, which are key to achieving the mode split goals the City has established. Beyond furthering those goals, it can also provide access to key

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
40 destinations for those who may not have a private vehicle, further expanding mobility offerings for all groups.

7.5 Implement a Transit Signal Priority Strategy
Single-occupancy vehicle trips dominate transportation mode splits in most cities, including San Luis Obispo. To reduce traffic and achieve more sustainable outcomes, a much larger percentage of people taking transit trips alongside other modes will be necessary. One way to achieve that increase in transit share is to incentivize public transit use by implementing initiatives to provide strategic advantages to transit operations in the transportation network.

These transit priority strategies allow transit to be more competitive on travel times, reliability, comfort, and convenience as compared to other vehicles.

Some examples of transit priority measures include bus-only lanes, signal priority for transit vehicles, or other physical or regulatory modifications that give public transit priority over other vehicles.

Studies of various deployments have shown that the cities with clear priority policies and strategic implementation plans have had the most successful deployments. It is critical to identify individual initiatives within the larger deployment and assign priority levels according to the city’s predefined criteria such as budget, resource usage, and schedule.

Initial projects are often selected based on their ability to demonstrate the benefits of the measures so that they can serve as benchmarks for future implementations. It can also help in placing standards for organizing planning work as well as drawing up a guidebook for including external and internal stakeholders who play an important role in the overall success of the project.

7.5.1 Conducting a TSP Plan
Transit Signal Priority (TSP) is an operational strategy that facilitates the movement of transit vehicles through traffic-signal controlled intersections. Some key benefits of implementing a TSP project include reducing queues, minimizing delays, and decreasing travel time for emergency vehicles. TSP can improve traffic flow and safety and enhance public response.

By reducing time lost at traffic signals, TSP can also reduce bus running time; and with conditional priority one can reduce the variability in the running time. This can lead to improved transit service and increased transit attractiveness.

A TSP plan would be a follow-up project and should be largely considered if there continue to be traffic impacts along specific routes post-construction. A TSP plan would likely follow the process identified herein.

7.5.1.1 Community Engagement
Community engagement is a critical component of any planning study. For transit priority measures, constituents and users of the system can play a key role in identifying transit reliability issues and travel time delays. Stakeholders can also be consulted when developing a list of what transit traffic measures are realistic for SLO Transit’s context and the impact those adjustments may have on other related services or programs. A few ways to engage the public on these topics may include onboard passenger surveys, online surveys disseminated through the website or social media, and in-person tabling at local community events.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
41 7.5.1.2 Data Collection and Analysis
Survey data can be combined with operations data to identify choke points, high delay areas, and other corridors that may require treatments depending on KPIs. Areas where high ridership routes currently operate with recurring delay are ideal candidates for improvements. Some of the operational data that can be used to find to determine these areas of focus include:
• Ridership by stop and by route
• Travel time
• Vehicle delay
o Running delay: delays on on-time performance associated with traffic on a route
o Signal delay: delays related to intersection red lights o Merge delay: delays associated with buses pulling over from a general traffic lane to a bus stop, or from a bus stop back into general traffic • Passenger delay
o Load delay: delays associated with boarding and alighting of passengers.

Typically weighted by ridership.
• Revenue vehicles/hour
Once a list of potential sites has been identified from the data, a number of additional factors may help the City narrow down the list of sites and determine which treatments to pursue. This analysis includes examination of:
• Physical constraints
o Existing curb-to-curb roadway capacity opportunities
o Locations of bus stops relative to intersections
• Infrastructure jurisdiction analysis
o Jurisdiction that manages and owns each identified roadway segment and immediately adjacent bridges, underpasses, overpasses, ramps, etc. o Jurisdiction that manages and owns each traffic signal along each identified segment of roadway
• Pedestrian, bus stop, and accessibility considerations:
o Number of current bus stops impacted
o Inventory of existing stop amenities (shelters, floating stop, etc.) • General pedestrian conditions assessment
o Curb ramps and other accessibility needs
o Street crossings and pedestrian safety
o Other items identified by the project team
• Existing or planned bike infrastructure.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
42 o Future bike infrastructure as identified in the SLO Active Transportation Plan • Existing or planned roadway investments
o Whether the roadway has had repaving, major tactical projects, or capital reconstruction implemented in the past ten years, and/or whether reconstruction or reinvestment in the roadway is planned in the near future. • Cost
o How much is each intervention being considered going to cost in the specific context in which it would be implemented
• Potential Improvement
o Comparing real operational data to potential data after improvements (e.g., transit signal priority infrastructure at intersection X is estimated to reduce travel times on that route by 10%)

7.5.1.3 Steps towards Implementation
Once specific treatment(s) and location(s) have been identified, the city would then take formal steps to pursue the project. This generally includes identifying funding sources, getting approval from City Council, and releasing any associated RFPs/RFQs for the proposed work.

Implementation on transit traffic projects can take one year or more depending on the scale of the project.

SLO may need to partner with other jurisdictions or agencies if the improvements involve changes to shared infrastructure (such as moving a bus stop) or improvements in roadways owned by other entities. Even in the event no other services are impacted, it will be critical for SLO to maintain involvement of other regional stakeholders and communicate with the community regarding improvements throughout the process.

7.5.2 Costs
TSP planning efforts can cost vary depending on the scope of the analysis and the number of locations being considered. Once a plan is complete, prices for TSP infrastructure can range from $8,000 to $35,000 per intersection, not including supporting central software.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
43 8 Summary
The SLO Transit Innovations Study investigated a broad variety of transit technologies and mobility opportunities and presents SLO Transit with only the most applicable solutions that may be of value to incorporate into short-range transportation planning efforts. The tailored list of recommendations was evaluated and sorted based on relevance to SLO, impact to ridership, timeframe, cost, and stakeholder feedback in order to determine each recommendation’s overall priority. This provides clear and actionable next steps for the City as it looks to improve service and add to future planning documents.

8.1 Recommendations
Table 9 summarizes the recommendations discussed in this plan. Each of the columns and the values displayed are described in more detail below.

Relevance to SLO: While each of these recommendations is generally relevant (other potential solutions have already been eliminated over the course of this project) this helps evaluate how directly each solution maps to the established needs of the city.

Impact to Ridership: Some recommendations will help restore ridership or aim to improve transit reliability so as to expand ridership. These are coded as high impact. Others are internal planning efforts or operational improvements that will help SLO Transit but may not have as direct an impact on ridership. These are coded as low impact.

Timeframe: Short range projects are recommended to be implemented within the next 6-12 months. Medium range items are projects that could be initiated between 12-24 months. Longterm items, while still worth pursuing, have dependencies or other long range planning efforts that make those efforts more realistic to be pursued 24+ months from the publishing of this study. Note that this is distinct from ‘Timeline’ which only provides guidance on how long each effort may take to complete once initiated.

Cost: In line with purchasing policies from the City of San Luis Obispo, recommendations may be considered:
• Low cost: Tier 1 and Tier 2 purchases (<$40,000 for professional services or <$60,000 for capital projects)
• Medium cost: Tier 2 or 3 purchases ($40,000-$70,000 for professional services or $60,000-$200,000 for capital projects)
• High cost: Tier 4 and Tier 5 purchases (<$70,000 for professional services or >$200,000 for capital projects)
Priority: This provides an overall priority level considering all other factors presented in this table.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
44 Table 9: Recommendations for SLO Transit
# Recommendation Category Relevance
to SLO
Impact to
Ridership Timeframe Cost Priority
1 Enhanced Service on Fixed Routes Enhanced
Service High High Medium High HIGH
2 Pursue open loop payments through
Cal-ITP
User
Experience High High Medium Medium HIGH
3 Replace CAD/AVL System on FixedRoute Vehicles Critical Tech High Low Short High HIGH
4 Upgrade Automatic Passenger
Counters on Fixed-Route Vehicles
Critical
Tech High Low Short Medium HIGH
5 Enhance Real-Time Passenger
Information
User
Experience Medium High Short Medium HIGH
6 Replace and Improve Camera
Systems
Critical
Tech High Low Short Medium MEDIUM
7 Fare Changes for Students, Seniors,
Low-Income Riders
Fare
Programs High High Short Low MEDIUM
8 Explore Institutional Partnerships Fare
Programs Medium High Medium Low MEDIUM
9 Pursue Micro-Transit Mobility
Services
Enhanced
Service Medium High Long Medium MEDIUM
10 Expand Downtown Access Program Fare
Programs High Medium Short Low MEDIUM
11 Launch a Bikeshare Program Enhanced
Service Medium Low Short Low MEDIUM
12 Install Lighting, Shelters, and Bike
Parking at Applicable Bus Stops
Shelter and
Streets Medium Medium Medium Medium MEDIUM
13 Establish a Mobility-as-a-Service
Platform
User
Experience Medium Medium Long High LOW
14 Investigate and Establish Mobility
Hubs
Shelter and
Streets Medium Medium Medium High LOW
15 Launch a Carshare Program Enhanced
Service Medium Low Medium Medium LOW
16 Implement a Transit Signal Priority
Strategy
Enhanced
Service Low Low Medium High LOW
17 Add Bus Bulb-outs Downtown Shelter and
Streets Medium Low Long Medium LOW

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
45 8.2 Funding Sources
The following presents current and potential funding sources for SLO Transit’s consideration in pursuing the recommendations outlined above.

The City receives its funding from fare revenues generated from its fixed-route service mode as well as contributions from local, state, and federal grant subsidy programs. The funding sources discussed in this section include both actual and projected revenue sources from the latest adopted budget supporting operations and capital.

Note that partnerships with third-party providers (i.e., contracting microtransit on-demand services to a company) can also limit upfront costs to agencies. Such strategies are not outlined in detail here and would need to be explored further in coordination with any such provider.

8.2.1 Local Transit Funding Sources
Passenger Fares: One of the largest direct local revenue sources is derived from SLO Transit’s farebox, which helps support operations and meet state-required performance measures. Farebox revenues are composed of cash fares sold on the bus, passes purchased at various vendors (including City Hall Finance counter, SLO Chamber of Commerce, Boo Boo Records, Laguna Middle School, and SLO High School), and digital passes purchased through the Token Transit mobile app.

Parking Fund: SLO Transit typically receives $20,000 annually from the parking fund; opportunities to increase parking fees to subsidize transit improvements could be explored further.

Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID): The TBID assessment is currently 2%, which is comparable to other TBIDs in the state. To increase funding, opportunities to expand the TBID assessment fee to 2.5% or 3% based on geographic zones could be explored.

Sponsored Routes or Services: SLO Transit does not currently collect revenue from local businesses for sponsoring routes or services. While this strategy does come with some costs and benefits, some agencies do use sponsorships to fund particular improvements or services throughout the city.

Transportation Development Act (TDA): Enacted by the State Legislature in 1971 to make funds available for transit, pedestrian way and bikeway projects, transportation planning, ridesharing and street and road improvements. TDA funds are the largest sole source of operating revenue for most public transportation systems in the state. Funds for the TDA come from 1/4 cent of the retail sales tax (for LTF), and from sales taxes on diesel fuel (for STA).

These funds are allocated annually by SLOCOG to eligible claimants under two funding programs: the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and the State Transit Assistance (STA).

Local Transportation Fund: LTF tax revenues are collected by the Board of Equalization but administered locally through SLOCOG, which then allocates the revenue to local jurisdictions based on population. Local jurisdiction LTF contributions are made to RTA as a requirement of their membership in the Authority to fund the regional transit service.

G-20 Measure: SLO residents passed a new city sales tax measure, G-20, in November 2020 that is anticipated to provide approximately $20 million annually to preserve and enhance quality of life by accomplishing a variety of objectives, one of which is for transportation

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
46 improvements such as repairing potholes, reducing traffic congestion, and expanding bike lanes. SLO Transit will benefit from this new tax measure indirectly through City projects that enhance local operating conditions and multimodal access and connectivity. The measure expenditure plan does not include direct funding to SLO Transit.

8.2.2 State Transit Funding Sources
Senate Bill 1: The most recent development at the state level concerns the passage and signing into law of SB 1 (Beall) in April 2017. SB 1, The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, provides the first significant, stable, and ongoing increase in state transportation funding in more than two decades. SB 1 is composed of a series of measures and revenue enhancements such as increases in the diesel and gasoline excise and sales taxes and vehicle registration fees.

State of Good Repair: The State of Good Repair (SGR) program is the result of the passage of SB1 and provides approximately $105 million annually to transit operators in California for eligible transit maintenance, rehabilitation and capital projects. The SGR program benefits the public by providing public transportation agencies with a consistent and dependable revenue source to invest in the upgrade, repair and improvement of their agency’s transportation infrastructure, and in turn improve transportation services. These funds are allocated under the State Transit Assistance (STA) Program formula to eligible agencies pursuant to Public Utilities Code (PUC) section 99312.1. Half is allocated according to population and half according to transit operator revenues.

Proposition 1B – Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account: On November 7, 2006, California voters approved Proposition 1B, the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006. This act authorized the issuance of $19.925 billion in general obligation bonds to invest in highpriority improvements to the state’s surface transportation system and to finance strategies to improve air quality. Among the programs contained in Proposition 1B is the $3.6 billion Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA).

PTMISEA funds are to be used to fund various mass transportation projects, including rehabilitation, safety, or modernization improvements, capital enhancements or expansion, rail transit improvement, bus rapid transit improvements, the acquisition of rolling stock, and other similar investments.

California Air Resources Board – Low Carbon Transit Operations Program: The Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) is one of several programs that are part of the Transit, Affordable Housing, and Sustainable Communities Program established by the California Legislature in 2014 by Senate Bill 862 (SB 862). The LCTOP was created to provide operating and capital assistance for transit agencies with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and improve mobility, with an emphasis on serving Disadvantaged Communities (DAC) and low-income communities. This program is administered by Caltrans in coordination with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the State Controller’s Office (SCO). These funds are part of the State Cap-and-Trade program and are derived from annual auction proceeds in the GHG Reduction Fund.

CARB issues competitive grant solicitations for the Air Quality Improvement Program (AQIP) and Low Carbon Transportation Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund Investments pursuant to AB 118. Each fiscal year, CARB must submit a proposed funding plan to its board for approval.

The funding plan serves as the blueprint for expending the AQIP funds appropriated to CARB

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
47 in the state budget. Annual funding allocations could aid in future procurements of low- or zeroemission transit and support vehicles.

California Air Resources Board - Sustainable Transportation Equity Project (STEP):

Includes implementation grants for transportation strategies that include Active Transportation, Fixed-Route Transit, and Shared Mobility. These strategies are meant to encourage mode shift from single-occupancy combustion vehicles, fill transportation gaps, and prioritize first/last mile connections.

8.2.3 Federal Revenue Sources
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) provides financial and technical assistance to local public transit systems. Since 1964, the FTA has partnered with state and local governments to create and enhance public transportation systems, investing more than $11 billion annually to support and expand public transit services. The FTA provides annual formula grants to transit agencies nationwide as well as discretionary funding in competitive processes.

The following table lists key FTA formula and competitive discretionary grant opportunities:

Table 10: FTA Grant Opportunities

FORMULA DISCRETIONARY
Section 5307: Urbanized Area Formula
Funding Program
Sections 5303, 5304, and 5305:

MPO/Statewide/Non-MPO Transportation
Planning
Section 5329: Public Transportation
Safety and Oversight
Section 5309: Capital Investment Grant
program (New Starts, Small Starts, Core
Capacity)
Section 5337: State of Good Repair (High
Intensity Fixed Guideway and High Intensity
Motorbus)
Section 5339: Bus and Bus Facilities and
No and Low Emission

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
48 Appendix A – Existing Systems

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
49 Table 11: Systems Inventory

TECHNOLOGY VENDOR DESCRIPTION END USERS MAJOR

FUNCTIONS AND
USERS
Onboard Systems
Mobile Data
Terminal
Bishop Peak The onboard central
processing unit that is
connected to and
manages data across all
the onboard systems,
automatic vehicle
location (AVL), audio
announcement system,
internal signs, headsigns,
and camera system (for
some vehicles).

Bus Driver Operator
communications,
performance
viewing
AVL Tablet Bishop Peak The onboard central
processing unit that is
connected to and
manages data across all
the onboard systems,
automatic vehicle
location (AVL), audio
announcement system,
internal signs, headsigns,
and farebox.

Bus Driver,
Maintenance
Communications,
data processing,
data storage, realtime location and
schedule tracking,
headsign
management,
internal sign
management
Farebox Genfare Is a validating farebox
that accepts cash and
magnetic stripe paper
tickets.

Driver,
Finance,
Maintenance
Validating cash
and fare media
payments.

Collecting and
storing cash
transactions.

Onboard Camera
Systems
SEON Onboard security video
monitoring and
management system
equipment installed
across the vehicle fleet
except three (3) vehicles.

Each set of onboard
system equipment
consists of an HVR
integrated with multiple
interior and exterior
cameras.

Operations Security video
footage
Driver-facing
Camera Systems
DriveCam Onboard security video
equipment comprising of
gyroscope and
accelerometer used for
performance and incident
monitoring
Operations,
Reporting
Security video
footage
Central Systems

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
50 Fixed Route
Scheduling
System
Excel/Email Software that is used to
generate the fixed route
schedule, blocks, runs,
and driver rosters
Scheduling Timetables,
operator runs,
mileage for NTD
Dispatching Bishop Peak The central software
used for vehicle tracking
and real-time
dispatching, operations.

Dispatch,
Maintenance
Dispatch
management,
messaging,
location and
schedule
monitoring,
operations data
communications.

Operations
Reporting
Bishop Peak,
internally
developed
reports
A data warehouse and
reporting tool for
operational data captured
by the AVL system.

Planning,
Management
On-time
performance and
other reporting on
AVL data.

Maintenance and
Management
System
Hexagon The central software that
is used for managing
workflows for all work
orders related to
preventive maintenance
(PM) and repairs for
vehicle components,
purchase order
management for parts
and generating
maintenance reports.

Repairs conducted by
contractors are also
tracked in this system.

Maintenance Work order
management,
parts inventory
management,
parts fulfillment.

Fare System Genfare Data
System, Token
Transit
Central data
management and
processing system for all
Genfare fare system
equipment.

Finance,
Maintenance,
Planning
Revenue
collection,
Planning data
analysis
Video
Management
Software
SEON Central video
management software to
manage camera video
from HVRs and cameras
installed across the SLO
fleet. The software allows
staff to search, tag,
download video
wirelessly and playback
videos.

Maintenance,
Safety
System video
monitoring,
training, risk
management,
claims
management.

Garage Systems

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
51 Vehicle
Diagnostic
Software
Engine
Diagnostic
software
Used to assess vehicle
health and performance;
software can vary
depending on vehicle
model and is often
different depending on
manufacturer.

Maintenance,
Safety
Vehicle health,
maintenance and
monitoring
Farebox Probing Genfare Farebox data probe
system to export fare
data from fareboxes into
central fare data system
Finance,
Maintenance
Farebox data
collection and
management
system.

EV Charging
Infrastructure
ChargePoint Chargers, dispensers,
and related equipment
that is used to power
electric vehicles.

Currently SLO has a
mobile charging set-up,
but permanent charging
infrastructure is planned
for the yard.

Operations,
maintenance,
planning
Charging and fuel
monitoring,
operations
Customer Systems
Real-time
Information
SLO Transit
app
The real-time information
dissemination software
used to provide
passengers information
about the vehicle
locations and arrival
predictions.

Customers,
Community
Relations
Customer
information
dissemination.

Fare Payment Token Transit
App
Mobile application that
lets customers buy and
activate transit tickets
from their phone
Finance,
Maintenance,
Planning
Revenue
collection,
Planning data
analysis
Third-Party
Applications
Transit App,
Moovit App,
Twitter
A variety of platforms that
are used to provide
customers information
about SLO service on
customers preferred
platform.

Community
Relations
Customer
information
dissemination and
detour
management.

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
52 Appendix B – Needs Assessment

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
53 Table 12: SLO Transit Needs
NO. NEEDS SUPPLMENTARY INFORMATION CATEGORY PRIORITY
1 Eliminate glitching/freezing of CAD system Dispatchers currently report system freezing periodically and are sometimes unable to tell where the buses are
through the CAD/AVL system.

Dispatch High
2 Annunciators in the buses should work
100% of the time
Right now, annunciators work around 70% of the time.

Sometimes drivers must announce stops.

Customer
Service,
Operations
High
3 Transit app should work across all device
types
Sometimes app works well on iPhones but not on
Android.

Customer
service
High
4 Electronic incident reporting features that
allow for distribution, electronic filing, and
ability to run reports in more automated
fashion.

Incident reports are currently done on paper and
dispatch scans paper reports and sends them out to all
relevant departments. This can cause delays and
increases manual burden on staff.

Administration High
5 Replace technology systems that have
reached the end of their useful life
SEON camera system aboard certain buses have
reached the end of its useful life and should be
replaced.

Operations High
6 A more reliable method of counting
passengers
The existing APC system is run through the AVL
system. It was installed on most of the buses, but they have not worked as intended since installation. City
would like this replaced with an NTD-compliant system.

Administration High
7 Improved CAD/AVL reporting capabilities A system that can perform runtime reports or more reliable passenger counts would alleviate manual
reporting requirements and improve processes.

Administration,
Reporting
High
8 Improved fare payment interface and openloop contactless payments Currently, only a few residents know about Token
Transit app that they can use to pay fares on SLO
Transit buses. It does not allow for the use of credit
cards or contactless payment on buses directly.

Customer
Service
High
9 A Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) application
that integrates transit, carshare, parking, EV
charging, and bikeshare
The city's Active Transportation Plan includes a goal of better integrating transit, carshare, and bikeshare.

Active
Transportation
High

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
54 10 Initiate or expand bike and car share
services
City staff would like to initiate docked bikeshare and
expand the carshare program (ZipCar) currently at
CalPoly.

Active
Transportation
High
11 A customer-facing transit app that shows
real-time bus location and predicted arrival
times more accurately
The current transit application shows bus location but is not always reliable. The predicted bus arrival times does not always consider on-route delays or detours. The City would like to explore other technologies that do allow for rerouting and reflect accurate arrival times.

Customer
Service
High
12 A user-friendly hotline for supporting
common bus location-based inquiries.

SLO gets calls from customers about bus arrival times
when there are delays or detours that are not reflected in the app. Current operations would benefit from some
real-time information to be available to customers over the phone without manual intervention. City would like to explore IVR in multiple contexts for providing information to customers.

Customer
Service
High
13 A reliable, user friendly interface for
reporting
Currently MS Access is used to prepare reports for the
city, and the interface is outdated. City would like to use staff time as efficiently as possible.

Administration High
14 Integrated camera system on buses that
provides the same capabilities fleet-wide
Currently, buses have two different systems- most have
older SEON systems, while 3 buses have camera
systems that interface with CAD/AVL software. The two
different systems result in procedural inconsistencies for data backup and incident reporting. Upgrading to a
single camera system that allows for wireless transfer of data would be beneficial.

Operations Medium
15 An integrated system where drivers can login fewer times Currently, every time before starting a shift, drivers must log-in to three different systems: Bishop Peak, NFC, and the Genfare platform.

Operations Medium

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
55 16 Additional camera angles and seamless file
sharing for onboard video
Checking video footage after an incident is primarily
done through DriveCam because it is more userfriendly. However, DriveCam only captures one angle and is not useful for incidents that occur on the side of the bus. These incidents require using a thumb drive to manually extract the footage from the onboard camera
systems hard drive.

Administration Medium
17 Integrated software for 3 different models of
EV buses
SLO Transit may soon have Battery Electric Buses from
3 different vendors (moving forward, it will be a single manufacturer)- New Flyer, Proterra, and Gillig. While the chargers will be universal, the diagnostic software will be proprietary for each vendor. This could lead to using three different software products for vehicle diagnostics.

Maintenance Medium
18 Bike locker locations and reservation
capability
Riders do not currently have the ability to easily reserve bike locker spaces and track their availability.

Active
Transportation
Medium
19 Working detour communication features on
transit application
This feature on the transit app has not been working as intended.

Customer
Service
Medium
20 Address service reliability routes 2a and 3 Long wait times on these routes is partially a product of construction work but impacts riders' ability to get where they need to go on time.

Service
Planning
Medium
21 Bus stops should incorporate real-time ETA
signage at more stops and ETAs should be
accurate
Real-time posts are not always accurate and are only
located at a few select stops. Other stops could benefit from upgraded infrastructure and accurate prediction
data.

Bus stops Medium
22 Dashboard for easy access to operational
statistics
City staff relies on First Transit for reporting information such as revenue, miles, and vehicle hours. An
accessible dashboard to check operational data from
the city side would assist with NTD reporting and
verification.

Administration,
Reporting
Medium

ARCADIS IBI GROUP FINAL REPORT

SLO TRANSIT INNOVATION STUDY
Prepared for SLO Transit
56 23 Easier process for acquiring free transit
passes and potential integration with a
MaaS application for doing this
Downtown employees in San Luis Obispo are permitted
to receive free transit passes, but passes require going to a specific office location and employees must reenroll every month Fareless/Comm
uter Programs
Medium
24 Digital wayfinding capabilities Bike and pedestrian wayfinding are inadequate in some areas. A digital wayfinding system could be an
affordable solution in targeted areas.

Active
Transportation
Low
25 A way of conveying bike parking locations
and availability
There is currently no system for residents to know the
locations and availability of bike parking spaces.

Active
Transportation
Low
26 E-bike charging infrastructure As e-bikes become more prevalent, there may more demand for public bike charging stations.

Active
Transportation
Low
27 More automated process for schedule
changes
Schedule changes from the City to the operator are
currently communicated via email. While the process
works fine, there is interest in exploring technologies that may be available to ease schedule change burden
or lessen the number of steps involved.

Service
Planning
Low
28 City access to maintenance data Currently, First Transit is responsible for reporting all maintenance data to SLO Transit; this process would be
simplified and data could be more easily verified if city staff had a login to review data or information from
Hexagon were shared directly into SLO Transit systems,
or if the operator were required to use SLO City systems for data sharing.

Administration,
Reporting
Low

Transit Innovation Study
Stakeholder Workshop
22 - 26 Sep 2023
Poll results

Table of contents
Please rank the following recommendations from the Transit Innovation Study in order of their ability to increase SLO Transit's ridership.

Ranking poll
Please rank the following recommendations
from the Transit Innovation Study in order of
their ability to increase SLO Transit's ridership.
(1/4)
0 1 4

1. Enhanced Service on Fixed Routes.

17.21 2. Pursue open loop payments through Cal-ITP, in coordination with RTA.

14.93 3. Replace CAD/AVL System on Fixed-Route Vehicles.

13.79 4. Upgrade Automatic Passenger Counters on Fixed-Route Vehicles.

13.07 5. Enhance Real-Time Passenger Information.

12.79

Ranking poll
Please rank the following recommendations
from the Transit Innovation Study in order of
their ability to increase SLO Transit's ridership.
(2/4)
0 1 4

6. Replace and Improve Camera Systems.

12.07 7. Implement Fare Changes for Students, Seniors, and LowIncome Riders.

10.86 8. Explore Institutional Partnerships.

10.64 9. Implement Microtransit Mobility Services.

10.43 10. Expand the Downtown Access Program.

9.71

Ranking poll
Please rank the following recommendations
from the Transit Innovation Study in order of
their ability to increase SLO Transit's ridership.
(3/4)
0 1 4

11. Establish a Mobility-as-a-Service Platform.

9.43 12. Install Lighting at Applicable Bus Stops.

9.36 13. Install Shelters at Applicable Bus Stops.

9.07 14. Launch a Bikeshare Program.

8.50 15. Investigate and Establish Mobility Hubs.

7.36

Ranking poll
Please rank the following recommendations
from the Transit Innovation Study in order of
their ability to increase SLO Transit's ridership.
(4/4)
0 1 4

16. Launch a Carshare Program.

6.64 17. Install Bike Parking/Bike Lockers at Applicable Bus Stops.

5.50 18. Implement a Transit Signal Priority strategy.

5.36 19. Add Bus Bulb-outs Downtown.

3.29