San Luis Obispo City Council
February 25, 2025

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 22

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO EXISTING POLICIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS As the public transit operator for the City of San Luis Obispo, SLO Transit is guided by the transportation policies defined in the City’s General Plan. In addition, the City develops transit program goals as part of the biannual budgeting process. Performance standards were developed as part of the 2009 SRTP effort and updated in the 2016 SRTP.

As stated in the City of San Luis Obispo 2023-2025 Financial Plan, the SLO Transit Core Service Objectives are as follows:
x Quality transportation for transit-dependent people.
x Convenient transportation for all community members.
x An attractive alternative to driving, which can reduce traffic congestion and air pollution.

SLO Transit Innovation Study
The SLO Transit Innovation Study was conducted on behalf of the City by Arcadis (Formerly IBI Group) in 2023. The City Council received a report from staff on the study on January 23, 2024. The dramatic loss in ridership that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic was a motivation for initiating the Transit Innovation Study. The Transit Innovation Study restates the City of SLO Climate Action Plan objectives of a 7 percent transit mode split, or the proportion of all trips made by transit, by 2030 and a 12 percent transit mode split by 2035.

The Transit Innovation Study provides actionable recommendations to improve fixed route service, explore alternative service modes, and broadly enhance transit as a viable alternative to the private automobile to meet the City’s adopted mode split objectives. The study recommends 17 transit innovations that are categorized into the following five themes:
- Critical Upgrades that Support Ongoing Operations
- Technologies that Improve Rider’s User Experience
- Fare Program Updates to Increase Transit Accessibility - Enhanced Service and Alternative Transit Options
- Bus Shelter and Street Improvements for Rider Safety and Comfort The Transit Innovation Study identified the need for improved fixed route service as one of the most critical needs. Specifically, the study recommended that the City consider increasing weekday headways on Routes 3 and 4 to 15-minute headways during the academic year. In addition, the Transit Innovation Study identifies the following strategies for improving fixed route service:
- Optimize Existing Routes: The study notes this can include better aligning service with peak demand, reducing travel times, and improving transfers between routes. This “fine-tuning” of routes to meet passenger needs can be done in phases. - Establish Express Bus Service: Express service means establishing limited stops along a route to reduce travel times. One potential option recommended by the study was to explore express bus service to downtown San Luis Obispo.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 23
- Increase Available Fleet and Drivers: Adding more buses and drivers would be necessary to increase frequency. Of course, budget constraints may have to involve trade-offs between more frequent service and route coverage throughout the City. - Expanding Service Operating Hours: Expanding service span to begin earlier in the morning and run later at night is another common improvement to fixed route service and another alternative that will be considered in the SRTP. While additional buses are not needed for expanded operating hours, it would require more driver shifts and increased bus mileage.

In addition to fixed route service improvements, the Transit Innovation Study recommends pursuing micromobility services. This would involve implementing one or more app-based on-demand services within specific zones. This is known generally as microtransit, and it could be a strategy to supplement or, in some cases, replace fixed routes to allow for fixed route resources to be relocated to increase fixed route frequency.

The core effort in an SRTP is the evaluation and recommendation of transit service alternatives, along with an assessment of the likely impact on ridership and costs. The 2024 SLO Transit SRTP will incorporate the recommended transit innovations into the service alternatives for SLO Transit as appropriate. In the meantime, City staff have noted that there are a few recommendations from the Transit Innovation Study that can be implemented in the short term while the SRTP is underway.

Expanded fare options for K-12 students, a recommended innovation, were already implemented in February of 2024: the City Council approved a pilot program to offer K-12 students single-ride fares for $1.00 and 15-ride passes for $15.00. This pilot program will last through June 5, 2025. The other improvements that staff believe can be implemented in the short term are:
- Open-Loop Fare Payment Technology – In December 2023, SLOCOG approved $2.6 million in TIRCP funds to implement the open-loop contactless payment system. The City will coordinate with RTA and SLOCOG to introduce this technology. - Pursue Grant Funding for Technology Upgrades – In November 2023, staff submitted projects to SLOCOG for both TIRCP and ZETCP funding for Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) and on-board surveillance cameras for buses. These requests have been submitted to the California State Transportation Agency for review.
- Upgrades to the Downtown Access Pass (DAP) Program – Policy changes to simplify this program can be done administratively with minimal cost. The Transit Innovation Study recommended replacing the 90-day re-verification requirement with an annual reverification. Also, it was recommended that enrolling in the program be simplified by completing an easy-to-access form.

San Luis Obispo General Plan
An updated City General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) was adopted by the San Luis Obispo City Council on December 9, 2014. The Circulation Element was amended in 2017 and includes the following key policy and program statements regarding transit:

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 24

1.6.1 Transportation Goals- Goal #2 Reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and using carpools. (Note that this goal is quantified in the document by setting a goal of 12 percent transit mode split).

1.7.1 Encourage Better Transportation Habits - San Luis Obispo should: 1. Increase the use of alternative forms of transportation and depend less on the single-occupant use of vehicles; and 2. Ask the RTA to establish an objective similar to #1 and support programs that reduce the interregional use of single-occupant vehicles and increase the use of alternative forms of transportation.

1.7.2 Promote Alternative Forms of Transportation - San Luis Obispo should: 2. Complete improvements to the city's transit system serving existing developed areas by 2035 and provide service to new growth areas.

1.7.4 Support Environmentally Sound Technological Advancement – 1B. When replacing any City vehicle or expanding the City's vehicle fleet, the City will consider purchasing alternative fuel vehicles that reduce air pollution.

1.7.5 Support a Shift in Modes of Transportation – San Luis Obispo will: 1. Physically monitor the achievement of the modal shift [of 12% transit], and bi-annually review and adjust transportation programs if necessary.

Traffic Reduction

2.2.4 Incentives for Educational Institutions - The City shall continue to work with Cal Poly, Cuesta College, and other educational institutions to provide incentives to all students, faculty, and staff to use alternative forms of transportation.

Transit Service Policies

3.1.1 Transit Development - The City shall encourage transit accessibility, development, expansion, coordination, and marketing throughout San Luis Obispo County to serve a broad range of local and regional transportation needs.

3.1.2 City Bus Service - The City shall improve and expand the city bus service to make the system more convenient and accessible for everyone. Transit services owned and operated by the City shall endeavor to maintain and improve all systemwide transit standards identified in the City’ SRTP.

3.1.3 Paratransit Service – The City shall continue to support paratransit service for seniors and persons with disabilities by public, private, and volunteer transportation providers.

3.1.4 Campus Service - The City shall continue to work with Cal Poly to maintain and expand the "free fare subsidy program" for campus affiliates. The City shall work with Cuesta College and other schools to establish similar programs.

3.1.5 Unmet Transit Needs - The City shall work with SLOCOG to identify and address Unmet Transit Needs.

3.1.6 Service Standards - The City shall implement the following service standards for its transit system and for development that is proximate to the transit network:

A. Routes, schedules, and transfer procedures of the City and regional transit systems should be coordinated to encourage commuter use of buses.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 25
B. In existing developed areas, transit routes should be located within 1/4 mile of existing businesses or dwellings.

C. In City expansion areas, employment-intensive uses or medium, medium-high, or highdensity residential uses should be located within 1/8 mile of a transit route.

D. The spacing of stops should balance patron convenience and speed of operation.

3.1.7 Transit Service Access - New developments should be designed to facilitate access to transit service.

Transit Service Programs

3.2.1 Transit Plans - The City shall continue to implement the SRTP (5-year time frame) and coordinate with SLOCOG on implementing the Long-Range Transit Plan (20-year time frame). The Plans shall consider funding partnerships to continue the Downtown Trolley service as part of the overall transit system as funding permits.

3.2.2 Bulk Rate Transit Passes - The City shall make available bulk rate transit passes to all groups.

3.2.3 Commuter Bus Service - The City of San Luis Obispo shall work with the RTA to maintain and expand commuter bus service to and from the City of San Luis Obispo during peak demand periods consistent with the SRTP and Long-Range Transit Plan.

3.2.4 Transit Service Evaluation - The City shall coordinate with the RTA to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of consolidated service.

3.2.5 Marketing and Promotion - The City shall develop and maintain a comprehensive marketing and promotion program to reach individual target audiences.

3.2.6 - The City shall update its SRTP to evaluate adding mass transit stops at the high school and the middle school.

3.2.7 - When evaluating transportation impacts, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.

3.2.8 Regional Transit Center - The City shall work with other agencies to develop a regional transit center downtown.

Air Transportation Policies

11.1.3 Public Transit Service - The City shall encourage improved public transit service to the County airport as soon as practical.

City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery (2020) The City of San Luis Obispo adopted the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery (CAP) in 2020. The CAP provides a work program to help the City reach carbon neutrality by 2035. A high-functioning transit system is a key component of the CAP and for reducing vehicle miles traveled. The CAP calls for electrifying transit fleets, reducing service headways, and for exploring new transit alternatives, such as microtransit, Bus Rapid Transit, and Transit Signal Priority, in the 2024 SLO Transit SRTP. CAP also recommends assessing the feasibility of a no-cost transit membership program. Some projects recommended in the CAP, such as updating the City’s Active Transportation Plan and developing a transit electrification plan, have since been completed.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 26
Volume 2 of the CAP is the Technical Foundation and Work Program, which includes the following actions related to transit:

Connected Community Action 4.1: Develop a transit electrification strategic plan and begin implementing it in 2020.

Connected Community Action 4.2: Shorten transit headways through accelerated implementation of the existing SRTP.

Connected Community Action 4.3: Explore additional innovative transit options in the 2024 SRTP (e.g., ondemand deviated routes, electric fleet expansion, microtransit, Bus Rapid Transit, and Transit Signal Priority).

Connected Community Action 4.3: Assess the feasibility of a “free to the user” transit ridership program.

Volume 3 of the CAP is the 2023-2027 Work Program, which includes the following near-term actions:

Connected Community Action 4.1.A: Continue to electrify the SLO Transit bus fleet.

Connected Community Action 4.2.A: Incorporate recommendations from the Transit Innovation Study into the SRTP and begin implementation immediately.

Biennial Budgeting Process
The City has developed an integrated process that ties goal setting with the bi-annual budget development. SLO Transit has a crucial role in the Major City Goal (MCG) for Climate Action, Open Space & Sustainable Transportation. The key strategies to support the City’s goal related to transit, and therefore relevant to the 2024 SRTP, are included below.

Major City Goal (MCG) Strategic Approach 4.3-
“Preserve and Enhance Convenient and Equitable Alternative and Sustainable Transportation Options:

The City will continue to implement actions in support of General Plan mode share targets (e.g., 50 percent of trips occurring outside of a single occupancy vehicle). This will occur through continued disciplined focus on the implementation of the highest priority (“Tier 1”) Active Transportation projects, innovations and improvements to transit service, and supportive programming. For those that need to drive, the City will focus on enabling and deploying publicly accessible electric vehicle charging infrastructure.”
Task K – “Transit Innovation Study implementation: Begin Planning implementation of strategies recommended in the Final Transit Innovation Study, including the incorporation of near-term strategies as part of the SLO Transit/RTA Short Range Transit Plan update, as called for in CAP Connected Community Task 4.2.A and the APMP Strategies 1.C.”
Within the Department of Public Works, the strategic goal to support the citywide MCGs is the following:
“Create a new division within the Public Works Department that will lead Parking, Transit, and Active Transportation with the goal of creating a cohesive team that will increase mobility within the City focusing on bridging gaps between transit, active transportation, and parking programs. Implement

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 27
objectives from the Active Transportation Plan including trail, pedestrian, and bicycle improvements and street enhancements to uphold traffic safety”.

This new division has been named the Mobility Services Division of Public Works which aims to further the organizational effectiveness of transit, parking, and active transportation under one umbrella division.
2016 Short Range Transit Plan
The last SRTP Update for the City of San Luis Obispo was completed in 2016 by LSC Transportation Consultants and AECOM, Inc. The 2016 SRTP included SLO Transit Service Standards, which were updated and carried over from the 2009 SRTP. Some of the key performance standards were based on the average of peer systems in the last SRTP update. The peer analysis conducted in the 2016 SRTP has been updated, as shown in Table 5, using the most recently available NTD annual reporting data (FY 2021-2022)
SLO Transit Triennial TDA Performance Audit
Every three years public transit operators in California that receive Transportation Development Act funding are reviewed by an independent firm selected by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency.

This is known as the Triennial Performance Audit (TPA).

For the FY 2013-14 through FY 2016-17 TDA TPA, SLO Transit was found to comply with all applicable TDA requirements. SLO Transit was also found to have partially implemented or to have been in the process of implementing two of the four recommendations made in the previous audit. The recommendations made in the audit were as follows:

1. “Revise revenue and cash handling practices to be compliant with industry best practices for an operation the size and scope of SLO Transit.

2. Provide consistent and accurate performance measures on all transit reporting, including State Controllers Reports, National Transit Database, and SLOCOG.

3. Take positive steps, in cooperation with the new operations manager, to develop an esprit de corps among SLO Transit operators and contractor staff.

4. Complete a full outside maintenance audit.

5. Enhance SLO Transit’s website to improve usability.

6. Add Grants and Reporting Coordinator position and reallocate duties among four (4) Transit Service positions.”
During the most recent audit period (FY 2017-18 – FY 2019-20), SLO Transit fully complied with six out of the nine applicable TDA requirements. SLO Transit was in partial compliance with submitting reports to the State Controller on time, calculating full-time employee equivalent data, and meeting farebox recovery ratio standards. SLO Transit had implemented three of the six previous audit recommendations (recommendations 3, 4, and 6, as numbered above), was in the process of implementing one recommendation (recommendation 1), and had partially implemented one recommendation (recommendation 2). The TPA provided three new recommendations for SLO Transit:

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 28

1. “Ensure that full-time-employee-equivalent data reported are consistent with the TDA definition.

2. Pursue the negotiation of a new transit-services agreement with Cal Poly that reflects the new operating environment.

3. Continue advocacy for funding a transit-grants coordinator.” FTA Triennial Review
SLO Transit’s latest FTA Triennial Review covered the three FYs of 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22. No deficiencies were found in 18 of the 23 topic areas covered in the review. The review found the deficiencies noted below.

1. Financial Management and Capacity – ECHO Documentation Deficient.

2. Financial Management and Capacity – Inadequate procedures for identifying federally assisted buildings in special flood hazard area and for determining sufficient levels of insurance

3. Financial Management and Capacity – No Evidence of physical inventory or reconciliation

4. Procurement – Lacking independent cost estimate

5. Procurement – Missing FTA Clauses

6. Procurement – Lobbying certifications not included in procurement solicitations or signed by bidders

7. Procurement – Contract files lacking signed Buy America certifications

8. Procurement – Missing documentation of bus model testing

9. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise – DBE Uniform reports contain inaccuracies and/or are missing required information

10. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise – Unreported transit vehicle purchases

11. ADA Complementary Paratransit – Insufficient oversight of contractors providing ADA complementary paratransit
The staff has addressed each of the deficiencies and will submit corrective actions to FTA in March of 2024.

SLO Transit Service Standards
Table 4 presents the existing SLO Transit service standards, FY 2022-23 performance for each metric, and recommended changes to the performance measures. In past SRTPs, SLO Transit’s fiscal condition standards of farebox recovery ratio, passengers per vehicle revenue hour, cost per passenger, and cost per vehicle revenue hour were tied to the performance of peer agencies. Because the City’s goals for transit are unique and ambitious, this SRTP proposes no longer linking SLO Transit performance standards to peers. Instead, peer agency performance should be used simply as a gauge to understand if SLO Transit is performing within industry norms.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 29
The Standard for farebox recovery ratio is set at 20 percent based on SLOCOG requirements. A minimum standard and a higher-performing target are being set for productivity, cost-effectiveness, and costefficiency standards. The recommended measures in these categories are as follows:
- Passengers per Vehicle Revenue Hour is set at a minimum of 11.5 based on the peer average, and a target standard of 36 based on the highest ridership year of FY 2015-16. - Cost per Passenger is set at a maximum of $11.23 based on the peer average, and a target standard of $3.85 based on current system costs and the ridership in FY 2015-16. - Cost per Vehicle Revenue Hour is set at a maximum of $145 based on the FY 2022-23 actuals with 5 percent allowed for inflation of labor, services, and supplies. This may need to be reevaluated based on future operating contract renewals. The target standard is set at $137.04 based on increasing vehicle revenue hours and miles back to the level provided in FY 2015-16 at current system costs.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 30
Table 4: SLO Transit Service Standards (1/2)
Standard Existing Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility Residential Availability 90% of population within ¼ mile of a bus route 66% No Change Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Employment concentrations of 200 or more employees Substantially served by transit No ChangeHealth Centers Substantially served by transit No Change Middle and High Schools Substantially served by transit No ChangeColleges/Universities Substantially served by transit No ChangeShopping Centers over 25 stores or 100,000 SF of retail space Substantially served by transit No ChangeSocial Service/Government Center Substantially served by transit No Change5 to 7 stops per mile in core (every other block) Data to be verified Provide 5 to7 stops per mile in core service area (every other block) Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Fringe 4 to 5 per mile, as needed based on land uses Data to be verified Provide 4 to 5 stops per mile outside of core service area based on land uses Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Frequency 30 minute peak 60 minute off peak
Route 1AB = 60min; Route 2= 60min; Route 3AB=30&60min; Route 4AB=45min; San Luis Tripper= 4 round trips; Laguna Tripper=1 round trip; 6X=30min; Trolley=20min 15 minute peak 30 minute off peak (as feasible within budget constraints and service availability goals)60 minute minimum 5 AM to 10 PM on weekdays 6:15 AM-11:10 PM Weekdays Will modify based on service alternatives6 AM to 7 PM on weekends 8:15 AM - 8:10 PM Weekends 8:15 AM - Midnight on Friday/Saturday Directness Maximum 25% of passengers transferring Per October, 2023 on-board survey 20% of SLO Transit passengers transferred Maximum 20% of passengers transferring Dependability 95% on-time service (not early and no more than 5 minutes late) Data to be verified No ChangeService Delivery Rate -- New Standard -- To begin measuring in FY 2024/24 or earlier if possible 99% or greater Standard
Existing
Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility Speed Regular routes maximum of 15 MPH Systemwide operating speed is 11.1 MPH. Route 3A is highest MPH @ 13.7; Route 4B is lowest MPH @ 8.3 Regular routes will operate at maximum of 15 MPH and a Minimum of 8 MPH Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Loading 25% standees for short periods acceptable Data to be verified No more than 25% standees for 15 minute periods Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City CouncilPublic Information Timetable, maps, advertising Public Information is widely available in all formats.

Website, Social Media, Timetable, maps, advertising shall be kept current and widely available. Adhere to the adopted public notice policy.

Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Service Delivery and Coverage
Patron Convenience
Sources: 2016 Short Range Transit Plan; 2022 National Transit Database; FY 2022-2023 SLO Operating DataFixed Route Transit Availability to Major Activity Centers Span Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City CouncilReported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Bus Stop Spacing

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 31
Table 4: SLO Transit Service Standards (2/2)
Standard Existing Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility No significant financial audit findings. -- New Standard -- No negative audit findings No Change Finance and Administration will report any negative audit findings. Fare Structure Fare Structure -Qualitative criteria Base one-way fare is $1.50 with discounts to senior and disabled. Multiple fare products available to passengers. CalPoly students ride free of charge Offer a Fare Structure that serves varied ridership markets and is simple for patrons to understand and use, and is up to date with current with technology Mobility Services Staff with City Council Approval of Fare Structure Modifications
Farebox Recovery - Significantly alter routes less than 60% of peer group average

19.1% TDA minimum farebox ratio of 20% systemwide including local support Review and modify routes between 60% and 80% peer group average -- Review and modify routes that are less than the systemwide required TDA farebox ratioSignificantly alter routes less than 60% of peer group average Passengers per Vehicle Revenue Hour = 16.7 Px/VRH Min= 11.5 SRTP Target = 36.0Review and modify routes between 60% and 80% peer group average -- Review and modify routes that are less than the minimum Significantly alter routes more than 140% of peer group average, or SLO system average cost per passenger Cost per Pax= $8.26Cost per VRH = $137.74
Cost Per PassengerMax = $11.23SRTP Target = $3.85Cost per VRHMax = $145SRTP Target = $137.04 Review and modify routes between 120% and 140% average -- Review and modify routes that exceed the the maximum Standard Existing Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ ResponsibilityCollisions -- Begin tracking on an annual basis Rate of preventable vehicle collisions will not exceed 1 per 100,000 vehicle miles Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City CouncilStandard Existing Measure FY 2022-23 Performance Proposed Measure Monitoring Schedule/ Responsibility 25 or More Boardings Data to be verified Provide passenger shelters, seating and lighting for bus stops with 20 or more boardings per day Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council -- -- Provide lighting at 100% of bus stops Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Bus Stop Signs Denote SLO Transit, contact information, and route Bus stop sign information denotes route and contact information 100% of signs are accurate, readable and in good condition Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Clean and good condition Bus appearance is clean and in good condition 100% of preventive maintenance will be performed within 10% of the scheduled mileage interval, or every 3 months Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council -- --
Replace 100% of all revenue vehicles no more than 40% beyond the FTA-defined useful life standard in terms of years or miles Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City Council Road Call Ratio 4,000 to 6,000 miles per road call Data to be verified No more than 5 road calls per 100,000 vehicle revenue miles Reported by Mobility Services Division Annually to the City CouncilProductivityCost Effectiveness and Efficiency Fleet and Facilities
Revenue Equipment
Fiscal Condition
Farebox Recovery
Safety
Sources: 2016 Short Range Transit Plan; 2022 National Transit Database; FY 2022-2023 SLO Operating Data Track Quarterly by Mobility Services Staff and report annually to City CouncilTrack Quarterly by Mobility Services Staff and report annually to City CouncilTrack Quarterly by Mobility Services Staff and report annually to City Council Waiting Shelters

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 32

SLO TRANSIT PEER COMPARISON
The purpose of this peer comparison is to provide information to gauge if local transit operating statistics are reasonable on a systemwide basis and to provide the agency information to evaluate potential changes to services and performance measures. The 2016 SRTP included a focused peer analysis to quantify SLO Transit’s fiscal and productivity standards. In addition, the 2016 SRTP included a more expanded peer analysis which was used to inform the creation of service alternatives. For this Working Paper #2, the peers from the prior SRTP were reviewed and narrowed down to the six peer transit systems below. These peers were selected, in consultation with City staff, based on university campus enrollment, city population, and number of buses in maximum fixed route service being within the same order of magnitude as San Luis Obispo. Also, for this comparison, zero-fare systems were not selected. The peer agencies are as follows:
x Bloomington-Normal, IL
x Bowling Green, KY
x St. Cloud, MN
x Pocatello, ID
x Flagstaff, AZ
x Pueblo, CO
The peer data shown is gathered from the National Transit Database 2021-2022 Reporting Year. It should be noted that multiple factors can cause variations in ridership, costs, and revenues among public transit operations. In addition, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic impacted ridership and service delivery differently among peers, factors which were not evaluated in this comparison.

Table 5 displays the performance indicators for the six peer transit agencies provides an analysis of SLO Transit’s performance indicators in relation to the grouped peer statistics and ranks SLO Transit’s performance indicators in relation to all peers combined.

For this peer comparison, an additional metric of Passenger Trips per Capita has been added. Among the peer fixed route services for 9 performance indicators, SLO has an average ranking of 3 out of 7 operators, including SLO Transit. SLO Transit’s highest ranking is 1st for average fare per passenger and farebox recovery ratio. SLO Transit’s lowest ranking is 7th for operating cost per vehicle revenue mile. It is notable that SLO Transit has the second-ranked farebox recovery ratio and is 248 percent of the peer average in that category. The passenger trips per capita among the peer agencies vary significantly from 1 passenger per capita in Bowling Green, KY to 33 in Bloomington-Normal, IL. The peer average is 11 passenger trips per capita. SLO Transit ranks 3rd with 10 passengers per capita. This peer comparison does not include a comparison of demand response peers because the City of SLO does not operate ADA paratransit service.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 33
Table 5: SLO Transit Peer Group Data and Performance Indicators Peer System University
Fall 2022
Enrollement
City
Population
2022
Fixed Route
Buses in
Service
Operating
Expenses Fare Revenue
Vehicle
Revenue
Miles
Vehicle
Revenue
Hours
Unlinked
Passenger
Trips
Bloomington-Normal Public Transit System Illinois State University 20,683 52,838 26 $10,627,212 $1,180,732 1,215,890 100,154 1,718,364City of Bowling Green Western Kentucky University 16,495 74,926 10 $1,176,202 $12,579 175,435 14,595 54,157City of Pocatello, dba: Pocatello Regional Transit Idaho State University 12,319 57,730 11 $1,112,945 $143,879 258,832 16,245 126,544Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public Transportation Authority, dba: Mountain Line public transit Northern Arizona University 23,207 75,907 19 $9,129,849 $1,129,816 912,707 73,569 1,298,670City of Pueblo, dba: Pueblo Transit Colorado State University Pueblo 33,648 111,456 14 $4,013,846 $308,974 482,040 34,791 497,528St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission, dba: Metro Bus St. Cloud State University 10,093 69,568 20 $9,338,001 $578,880 980,663 72,238 598,396City of San Luis Obispo, CA Cal Poly San Luis Obispo 21,778 48,341 15 $3,348,735 $710,758 330,244 28,144 468,945 Peer System Passenger Trips per Capita
Cost per
Vehicle
Revenue Mile
Cost per
Vehicle
Revenue
Hour
Passenger per
Vehicle
Revenue Mile
Passengers
per Vehicle
Revenue
Hour
Cost per
Passenger
Average
Fare
Subsidy per
PassengerTrip
Farebox
Recovery
Ratio
Bloomington-Normal Public Transit System 33 $8.74 $106.11 1.41 17.2 $6.18 $0.69 $5.50 11.1%City of Bowling Green 1 $6.70 $80.59 0.31 3.7 $21.72 $0.23 $21.49 1.1% City of Pocatello, dba: Pocatello Regional Transit 2 $4.30 $68.51 0.49 7.8 $8.79 $1.14 $7.66 12.9% Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public Transportation Authority,dba: Mountain Line public transit 17 $10.00 $124.10 1.42 17.7 $7.03 $0.87 $6.16 12.4%
City of Pueblo, dba: Pueblo Transit 4 $8.33 $115.37 1.03 14.3 $8.07 $0.62 $7.45 7.7%St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission, dba: Metro Bus 9 $9.52 $129.27 0.61 8.3 $15.61 $0.97 $14.64 6.2% Peer Maximum 33 $10.00 $129.27 1.42 17.7 $21.72 $1.14 $21.49 21.2% Peer Average 11 $7.93 $103.99 0.88 11.5 $11.23 $0.75 $10.48 10.4% Peer Minimum 1 $4.30 $68.51 0.31 3.7 $6.18 $0.23 $5.50 1.1% City of San Luis Obispo, CA 10 $10.14 $118.99 1.42 16.7 $7.14 $1.52 $5.63 21.2% SLO Transit % of Peer Avg. 89% 128% 114% 161% 145% 64% 201% 54% 205% SLO Transit Rank (1 = Best) 3 7 5 2 3 3 1 2 1
Note 1: Peer Data for FY 2021-22Note 2: Data for fixed route services only.Source: National Transit Database; US Census Performance Indicators
Input Data 1, 2

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 34

SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (SLOCOG)
As the Regional Transportation Planning Agency and the Metropolitan Planning Organization, SLOCOG is integral in the funding allocation and planning process for transportation projects and programs including public transit. As such, it is worthwhile to review SLOCOG policies and monitoring efforts. As discussed below, the primary policy document that directly addresses transit policy, funding, and projects is the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

SLOCOG 2023-2045 RTP
SLOCOG’s 2023 – 2045 Regional Transportation Plan, adopted in June of 2023, provides an important regionwide planning and policy document. The Vision Statement of the RTP is “A fully integrated, intermodal transportation system that facilitates the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and information within and through the region.” To support the vision the RTP identifies the seven “Pillars” of Infrastructure, Mobility, Economy, Safety, Healthy Communities, Environment, and Fiscal Responsibility that are supported by Goals and Policy Objectives. The RTP identifies 28 Action Strategies specifically for public transportation3
.

EXISTING MONITORING AND ONGOING SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES RTA
RTA staff conducts the following data collection and evaluation regularly:
x Ridership by service/route
x Service quantities
x Productivity
x Costs and budget tracking
x Farebox recovery ratio
x Preventable collisions
x Road calls
The following data is reviewed quarterly (and reported to the board semi-annually):
x Service delivery rate
x On-time performance by route and by service
x Passenger loads (crowding) by route
Other standards are reviewed on an annual or biennial basis. 3 SLOCOG 2023-2045 Regional Transportation Plan Final, Adopted June 7, 2023 – Chapter 3: Vision, Goals Policies

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 35
City of San Luis Obispo
Monthly, the contractor (Transdev) provides a summary report that details the following:
x Ridership by route by fare category
x Total passenger revenue by fare category
x Revenue and non-revenue vehicle hours and miles, by route and by weekday/Saturday/Sunday x Ridership per revenue vehicle-miles and revenue vehicle-hour, by route x Costs and budget tracking
A “Performance Measures Report” is prepared by SLO Transit staff quarterly. This summarizes the following data:
x Passengers by mode (fixed route daytime, trolley, fixed route evening) x Revenue-hours and revenue-miles by mode
x Productivity (passengers per revenue hour) by mode
x Contractor operating costs by mode
x Fare revenues by mode
x Farebox ratio by mode
x Average fare by mode
x Cost and subsidy per rider, by mode
x Year-over-year trends in ridership by fare type, revenue hours, and revenue miles, by weekday/Saturday/Sunday

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 36

GOALS AND POLICIES DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following is an initial discussion of recommendations for goals, objectives, and standards. This may be updated for the draft plan based on the results of the service alternatives analysis.

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
The City’s General Plan provides a reasonable set of goals for the transit program. It bears noting that if the City is to achieve the General Plan and Climate Action Plan goal of a 12 percent transit mode split by 2035, it would require a substantial expansion of transit ridership. SLO Transit achieved its highest ridership in FY 2015-2016 at just over 1.2 million boardings. In the first full fiscal year of the COVID-19 pandemic – FY 2020-2021 – ridership fell to 179,456. Ridership increased to 515,002 in FY 2022-2023 and continues to increase. City staff recently reported that a comparison of existing transit ridership with total travel demand indicates that at present approximately 2 percent of travel is via transit4 . SLO
Transit would need to double its current ridership to return to the 2016 peak ridership of 1.2 million. At that time, staff reported a calculated mode share of 7 percent for transit. It also may well require some combination of “auto disincentives” such as expanded paid parking programs and restrictions on parking availability to achieve the 2030 goal of 7 percent and the 2035 goal of 12 percent.

It would be beneficial to the transit program to develop and adopt its own Mission Statement separate from the City’s. This key policy element can help focus the organization on those ideals that are most important and can also help create a sense of common purpose within the staff of the Mobility Division of DPW. A reasonable starting point would be “To enhance the mobility and environment of San Luis Obispo through effective and safe public transit services.” Recommended standards for SLO Transit services are identified in Table 4. Specific considerations regarding the performance standards are as follows:
x The service span standards for weekends (6:00 AM to 7:00 PM) may be too broad, as it exceeds the current AM span (8:15 AM to 8:10 PM). The service span for weekdays (5:00 AM to 10:00 PM) is exceeded by existing service at night, which is 11:10 PM for Route 3A. However, morning service begins at 6:15 AM, which is 1 hour and 15 minutes after the stated standard. Service to the Cal Poly campus later into the night has been discussed in recent public forums as being a priority transit improvement. This SRTP process will evaluate expanded span of service as part of the potential service alternatives.
x The road call ratio shown in the 2009 and 2016 SRTP (4,000 to 6,000 miles per road call) would better be stated as “no less than X road calls per 100,000 vehicle service miles”. In the FY 2021- 2022 National Transit Data Report, SLO Transit reported an average of 4,234 miles between major mechanical failures. The median number of miles between major mechanical failures (similar definition to “road call”) for similar-size fixed route operators in California was 27,000 miles5
. Given that the current minimum standard of 4,000 miles is relatively low compared to 4 2019 City Transportation Survey as reported by City staff in January 23, 2024 Council Agenda Report for the Transit Innovation Study Review
5 FY 2022 NTD Annual Data – Using California operators with 75 or fewer vehicles in maximum service for motor bus mode only.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 37
the transit industry's typical standards, it is recommended that a standard of “no more than 5 road calls per 100,000 vehicle revenue miles” be added. In addition, it is recommended that transit staff review the incidents reported as major mechanical failures that fit the definition provided in the NTD reporting guidelines to ensure that mechanical failures are not being overreported. x The operating speed standard is stated as a maximum of 15 MPH. It is recommended that a minimum route operating speed be established as well. Given the current range of operating speeds between 8.3 and 13.7 MPH among SLO Transit routes, the recommended measure is “Regular routes will operate at a maximum of 15 MPH and a minimum of 8 MPH”. x The recommended changes to the Farebox Recovery Ratio, Passengers per Vehicle Hour, Cost per Passenger, and Cost per Vehicle Revenue Hour are discussed in the introduction to Table 4 above. The quantification of these standards is based on a review of peers, current year costs, and the maximum ridership in FY 15/16.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 38
This page intentionally left blank.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 39
Chapter 5

STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS

INTRODUCTION
This chapter reviews the demographic and economic characteristics of both San Luis Obispo County and the City of San Luis Obispo, with a focus on data relevant to transit demand and the near-term future of RTA and SLO Transit services.

DEMOGRAPHICS
Population Projections
Population projections are useful for estimating how transit demand may change in the future; if the population grows, transit demand will likely increase as well. Population projections by age group for San Luis Obispo County, sourced from the California Department of Finance, are shown in Table 6.

Overall, the San Luis Obispo County population size is expected to remain relatively consistent over the upcoming decades, growing by less than 2 percent from 2020 to 2040.

Within the current decade, the fastest-growing age group is senior adults: from 2020 to 2030, the population of mature retirees (those between 75 and 84 years old) is forecasted to grow by 61 percent and the population of older seniors (those ages 85 and older) is forecasted to grow by 24 percent. The older senior population is expected to continue growing from 2030 to 2040, meaning the older senior cohort will almost double in size from 2020 to 2040 (+98 percent). All the other age cohorts are experiencing negative growth this decade except for infants and toddlers (+3 percent). The college-aged adult population projections do not account for the many Cal Poly students who do not live in San Luis Obispo County full-time and therefore are not technically considered residents.

The forecasted growth of San Luis Obispo County’s senior adult population is important, as many seniors rely on transportation services for mobility. The growing senior population will likely drive increased demand for transportation services catered to the needs of seniors, such as non-emergency medical transportation, door-through-door services, and paratransit.

Table 6: San Luis Obispo County Population Projections by Age Category Year
Total
(All Ages)
Preschool
(0-4 years)
School Age to
Young Adult
(5-17 years)
College Age
(18-24 years)
Working Age
(25-64 years)
Young
Retirees
(65-74 years)
Mature
Retirees
(75-84 years)
Older Seniors
(85 or older)
2020 282,639 12,638 35,703 32,797 141,676 34,410 17,428 7,987 2030 286,547 13,015 33,548 32,333 134,940 34,639 28,131 9,941 2040 287,621 15,367 34,702 25,380 142,440 25,058 28,855 15,819 2020 to 2030 Change
Number 3,908 377 -2,155 -464 -6,736 229 10,703 1,954
Percent 1% 3% -6% -1% -5% 1% 61% 24%
2030 to 2040 Change
Number 1,074 2,352 1,154 -6,953 7,500 -9,581 724 5,878
Percent 0% 18% 3% -22% 6% -28% 3% 59%
Sources: US Census Bureau, California Department of Finance. Report P-2B: Population Projections by Individual Year of Age, 2010-2060, California Counties

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 40
Transit Dependent Population
A large portion of transit ridership is drawn from what is referred to as the transit-dependent population. The transit-dependent population is typically considered to comprise youths, senior adults, persons with a disability, low-income persons, and persons who live in zero-vehicle households. This section discusses where transit-dependent persons live in San Luis Obispo County and the City of San Luis Obispo, and in turn what areas of the County and City have the greatest need for transit services based on demographics. Appendix B includes additional data and maps depicting where transitdependent persons live in both the County and City.

San Luis Obispo County
An analysis of San Luis Obispo County demographic data by census tract (Appendix B), sourced from the US Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2022 5-Year Estimates, yielded the following takeaways:

About 17 percent of San Luis Obispo County residents are youth younger than 18 years old, slightly lower than the rate observed across the State of California (22 percent).

Communities home to large numbers of the overall countywide youth population include Paso Robles, the City of San Luis Obispo, Atascadero, Nipomo, and Arroyo Grande.

Senior adults over the age of 65 comprise 21 percent of the total San Luis Obispo County population, a greater rate compared to the State of California (16 percent). The City of San Luis Obispo, Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, and Los Osos are all home to significant proportions of the overall countywide senior population. 13 percent of San Luis Obispo County residents have a disability, based on the definition used by the US Census Bureau. This is a similar disability prevalence in the State of California (12 percent). Large proportions of the countywide disabled population live in the City of San Luis Obispo, Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, and Atascadero.

It is estimated that 12 percent of San Luis Obispo County residents are persons living below the federal poverty level. The San Luis Obispo County poverty rate is identical to what is observed across the State of California as a whole (12 percent). Although the City of San Luis Obispo is technically home to about half of the county’s low-income population, this statistic is swayed due to the large number of full-time students living in the community. Other communities with large numbers of low-income residents include Paso Robles and Atascadero.

The US Census Bureau estimated that 4 percent of San Luis Obispo County homes are zerovehicle households. This is a lower rate than the State of California as a whole (7 percent). A third of the county’s zero-vehicle households are located in the City of San Luis Obispo.

Other communities with many of the county’s total zero-vehicle households are Atascadero, Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, and Nipomo. It should be noted that San Luis Obispo County has an identical rate of single-vehicle households as the State of California (31 percent).

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 41
San Luis Obispo County Transit Needs Index
The purpose of the Transit Needs Index (TNI) is to discern which areas of San Luis Obispo County have the greatest comparative need for transit services across all of the transit-dependent subgroups. The TNI succinctly reveals how transit-dependent residents are distributed across San Luis Obispo County, and in turn where additional or expanded transportation services may be most warranted. The San Luis Obispo County TNI is shown in Table 7 and Figures 3 through 6.

To develop the TNI, the population density of each subgroup was calculated for each census tract. Then, the concentration values were divided into five groups. The groups were used to rank the subgroups within each community on a scale of 1 (very low need) to 5 (very high need) based on the density of said group (number of people per square mile) compared to the respective density of that demographic group in the other census tracts. The five respective rank scores for each census tract were then summed to determine an overall TNI rank.

The areas with the highest TNI ranks, and therefore the greatest assumed need for transportation services, are Grover Beach, Oceano, west and southwest Arroyo Grande, Paso Robles, Baywood Park in Los Osos, and various neighborhoods in the City of San Luis Obispo. Transit needs within the City of San Luis Obispo are discussed in greater detail in the following section. Regions of San Luis Obispo County with moderate need for transit services, based on the TNI, include northeast Morro Bay, Atascadero, and Nipomo. All of the areas with high to moderate needs are already served with transit, either by the RTA, SLO Transit, or other local transit services such as Morro Bay Transit, Atascadero Dial-a-Ride, or Nipomo Dial-a-Ride.

It should be noted that while the TNI provides a useful assessment of transit needs, other factors, such as total population size and development density, also need to be considered when determining where to expand transit services. For instance, even though some areas ranked highly in the TNI due to a high concentration of potentially transit-dependent persons in the area, the overall populations are small.

Consequently, it may not be feasible to operate transportation services in those areas due to the high operating cost that would be required but likely very low ridership.

Note: View from Pismo Preserve [Photo]. Sourced from Highway 1 Roadtrip, 2023.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 42
Table 7: San Luis Obispo County Transit Needs Index (1/2) 1 2
3 4
5 Youth
(Under 18
Years)
Senior Adults
(65+)
Persons with a
Disability
Persons Below
Poverty Level
Zero-Vehicle
Households
Overall Transit
Needs Index
Rank
100.16 San Miguel 11111 5
100.17 Lake Nacimiento 11111 5
101.01 Paso Robles - West 11111 5
101.03 Paso Robles - Central 11111 5
101.04 Paso Robles - North 51211 10
102.02 Paso Robles - South East 11111 5
102.04 Paso Robles - South 53211 12
102.05 Paso Robles - East 54213 15
102.06 Paso Robles - Union Road 21111 6
102.07 Paso Robles - North East 11111 5
103.01 Shandon 11111 5
103.02 Paso Robles, Templeton 11111 5
103.03 Whitley Gardens 11111 5
104.03 Cambria - South 11111 5
104.04 Cambria - North 11111 5
105.04 Cayucos 11111 5
105.05 Morro Bay - North East 13311 9
105.06 Morro Bay - North West 11111 5
106.02 Morro Bay - South 12111 6
106.03 Morro Bay - Central 11111 5
107.01 Los Osos - Baywood Park 55411 16
107.03 Los Osos - East 32111 8
107.07 Los Osos - Cuesta-by-the-Sea 11111 5
109.02 SLO - Northeast 11155 13
109.03 Cal Poly SLO - South 11245 13
109.04 Cal Poly SLO - North 11111 5
110.01 SLO - Southeast 11111 5
110.02 SLO - East 11111 5
111.01 SLO - Downtown 21335 14
111.03 SLO - South 11111 5
111.04 SLO - Broad St 31115 11
111.05 SLO - South Central 54115 16
112.01 SLO - Foothill Blvd, Highland D 11111 5
112.02 SLO - Downtown (Northwest) 11111 5
113 SLO - Laguna Lake 11111 5
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Very High Rank
Census Tract
Legend
Very Low Rank
Low Rank
Medium Rank
High Rank
Rank

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 43
Table 7: San Luis Obispo County Transit Needs Index (2/2) 1 2
3 4
5 Youth
(Under 18
Years)
Senior Adults
(65+)
Persons with a
Disability
Persons Below
Poverty Level
Zero-Vehicle
Households
Overall Transit
Needs Index
Rank
114 CA Men's Colony 13111 7
115 SLO - S. Higuera St. 42311 11
115.1 SLO - Camp SLO, SLO Airport 11111 5
116 Avila Beach, Port San Luis 11111 5
117 Pismo Beach, Shell Beach 12111 6
117.1 Pismo Beach - South 13111 7
117.1 Pismo Beach - East 11111 5
118 Arroyo Grande - North 11111 5
119 Arroyo Grande - Southeast 11111 5
119 Arroyo Grande - West 44111 11
119 Arroyo Grande - Southwest 55515 21
120 Grover Beach - South 55511 17
120 Grover Beach - East 54511 16
121 Grover Beach - West 53311 13
122 Oceano - West 42211 10
122 Oceano - Halcyon 45414 18
123 Edna, Huasna 11111 5
123.1 Los Berros 11111 5
123.1 Black Lake, Callender 11111 5
124 Nipomo - Southwest 21111 6
124 Nipomo - Northwest 21111 6
124.1 Nipomo - Southeast 11111 5
124.1 Nipomo - Northeast 21111 6
125 Atascadero - Northeast 41111 8
125 Atascadero - Southeast 41111 8
125.1 Atascadero - North 11111 5
126 Atascadero - Southwest 21111 6
126 Atascadero - Northwest 11111 5
127.1 Santa Margarita 11111 5
127.1 Santa Rita, Morro Toro 11111 5
127.1 Templeton - West 11111 5
127.1 San Luis Obispo Co. - Southeast 11111 5
130 San Simeon 11111 5
131 Templeton, Creston 11111 5
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Very High Rank
Census Tract
Legend
Very Low Rank
Low Rank
Medium Rank
High Rank
Rank

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 44

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 45

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 46

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 47

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 48
City of San Luis Obispo
City of San Luis Obispo demographic data, sourced from the US Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 2022 5-Year Estimates, was reviewed by the census block group to determine patterns regarding transit dependency. Key trends are listed below:

Youths younger than 18 years old comprise 9 percent of the city’s population, similar to the rate observed countywide. Block groups with large youth populations include those encompassing the southeastern and southern areas of the city, Laguna Lake, S. Higuera Street, and the area near the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport.

About 12 percent of the City of San Luis Obispo’s residents are senior adults over the age of 65, significantly less than the countywide rate. Block groups in the southeastern, southern, and Laguna Lake areas of San Luis Obispo are home to the greatest number of senior adults.

The City of San Luis Obispo has a low disability rate, with only 8 percent of the city’s population estimated to have a disability per US Census Bureau definitions. The three block groups home to the most disabled residents are located in southern San Luis Obispo, in the northwestern area of Downtown, and along S. Higuera Street.

A quarter of residents in the City of San Luis Obispo are estimated to be persons living below the federal poverty level, as defined by the US Census Bureau. This is significantly higher than the countywide rate (12 percent), however, this statistic is influenced by the high number of university students living in the city who do not work or only work parttime. Block groups with large numbers of low-income residents include those encompassing Downtown, Foothill Boulevard, Highland Drive, the northeastern portion of the city, and the neighborhoods directly adjacent to the Cal Poly campus. 7 percent of homes in the City of San Luis Obispo are zero-vehicle households, a greater proportion than what is observed countywide. Most zero-vehicle households are located in block groups encompassing Downtown, Broad Street, and neighborhoods near Cal Poly. The City has a similar rate of single-vehicle households as the State and County (32 percent).

City of San Luis Obispo Transit Needs Index
As previously mentioned, the Transit Needs Index (TNI) shows which areas have the greatest relative need for transit services based on the concentration of transit-dependent residents. The method for calculating the TNI ranks was described in the previous section discussing countywide demographics.

The City of San Luis Obispo TNI is shown in Table 8 and Figure 7.

Most areas of the City of San Luis Obispo have moderate to high transit needs based on the TNI. Block groups encompassing Downtown and south-central San Luis Obispo have the overall highest TNI ranks, scoring either high or very high for the majority of demographic categories considered. Block groups with moderate transit need, based on the TNI, are found in northeastern, eastern, and southeastern San Luis Obispo, along S. Higuera Street, Foothill Boulevard, and Highland Drive, as well as near the southern portion of the Cal Poly campus. Of the aforementioned areas with high to moderate transit needs, all are served with some level of SLO Transit and/or service.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 49

Table 8: City of San Luis Obispo Transit Needs Index
1 2
3 4
5 Census
Tract
Block
Group
Youth
(Under 18
Years)
Senior Adults
(65+)
Persons with a
Disability
Persons Below
Poverty Level
Zero-Vehicle
Households
Overall Transit
Needs Index
Rank
109.02 1 SLO - Northeast 14 1 2 1 9
109.02 2 SLO - Northeast 11 4 5 4 15
109.02 3 SLO - Northeast 11 5 5 5 17
109.03 1 Cal Poly SLO - South 11 5 4 5 16
109.03 2 Cal Poly SLO - South 11 3 1 2 8
109.03 3 Cal Poly SLO - South 11 4 1 3 10
109.04 1 Cal Poly SLO - North 11 1 1 1 5
109.04 2 Cal Poly SLO - North 11 1 1 1 5
110.01 1 SLO - Southeast 55 5 1 1 17
110.01 2 SLO - Southeast 11 1 1 1 5
110.01 3 SLO - Southeast 35 4 1 1 14
110.02 1 SLO - East 11 1 1 1 5
110.02 2 SLO - East 15 5 1 2 14
111.01 1 SLO - Downtown 54 5 2 5 21
111.01 2 SLO - Downtown 13 3 1 4 12
111.01 3 SLO - Downtown 33 4 1 4 15
111.03 1 SLO - South 12 1 1 1 6
111.03 2 SLO - South 13 1 1 1 7
111.04 1 SLO - Broad St 33 3 1 4 14
111.05 1 SLO - South Central 45 1 1 2 13
111.05 2 SLO - South Central 55 4 1 5 20
111.05 3 SLO - South Central 45 1 1 2 13
112.01 1 SLO - Foothill Blvd, Highland D 34 5 4 1 17
112.01 2 SLO - Foothill Blvd, Highland D 11 1 1 1 5
112.02 1 SLO - Downtown (Northwest) 11 1 1 1 5
112.02 2 SLO - Downtown (Northwest) 14 3 1 3 12
113 1 SLO - Laguna Lake 11 1 1 1 5
113 2 SLO - Laguna Lake 12 1 1 1 6
113 3 SLO - Laguna Lake 33 2 1 1 10
113 4 SLO - Laguna Lake 31 1 1 1 7
113 5 SLO - Laguna Lake 14 2 1 1 9
114 1 CA Men's Colony 15 1 1 1 9
115.01 1 SLO - S. Higuera St. 44 4 1 1 14
115.05 1 Camp SLO, SLO Airport 11 1 1 1 5
115.05 2 Camp SLO, SLO Airport 11 1 1 1 5
Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Rank
Legend
Very Low Rank
Low Rank
Medium Rank
High Rank
Very High Rank

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 50
5RXWH0DS2XWGDWHG:LOOEH8SGDWHGLQ)LQDO3ODQ

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 51
The City TNI should be considered alongside other data, such as total population size, activity centers, and development density, to determine whether transit services should be increased to unserved or underserved areas.

COMMUTING PATTERNS
Commuting data for San Luis Obispo County, sourced from the US Census Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics dataset (2021), is presented in Table 9. The top portion of the table shows where employees working in San Luis Obispo County commute from, while the bottom portion shows where residents of San Luis Obispo County commute to.

Counties # of Jobs % of Total Cities/Towns # of Jobs % of Total San Luis Obispo 71,112 68.0% San Luis Obipo 11,977 11.5% Santa Barbara 11,633 11.1% Paso Robles 9,661 9.2%
Los Angeles 3,310 3.2% Atascadero 9,285 8.9%
Kern 1,608 1.5% Santa Maria 6,077 5.8%
Fresno 1,511 1.4% Arroyo Grande 4,540 4.3%
Monterey 1,490 1.4% Los Osos 3,933 3.8%
Orange 1,204 1.2% Nipomo 3,648 3.5%
Ventura 1,046 1.0% Grover Beach 3,487 3.3%
San Diego 910 0.9% Morro Bay 2,978 2.8%
Tulare 907 0.9% Templeton 2,453 2.3%
All Other Locations 9,862 9.4% All Other Locations 46,554 44.5% Total Number of Jobs 104,593 Total Number of Jobs 104,593 Counties # of Jobs % of Total Cities and Towns # of Jobs % of Total San Luis Obispo 71,112 64.8% San Luis Obipo 20,635 18.8% Santa Barbara 10,911 9.9% Paso Robles 9,444 8.6%
Los Angeles 7,630 7.0% Atascadero 7,097 6.5%
Orange 2,227 2.0% Santa Maria 6,330 5.8%
Kern 2,121 1.9% Arroyo Grande 3,669 3.3%
Monterey 1,663 1.5% Los Angeles 3,467 3.2%
Fresno 1,656 1.5% Templeton 3,298 3.0%
Ventura 1,521 1.4% Pismo Beach 2,776 2.5%
Santa Clara 1,399 1.3% Morro Beach 2,665 2.4%
San Diego 1,119 1.0% Grover Beach 1,904 1.7%
All Other Locations 8,385 7.6% All Other Locations 48,459 44.2% Total Number of Jobs 109,744 Total Number of Jobs 109,744 Note: Bold text indicates locations within San Luis Obispo County.

Source: US Census Bureau LEHD Database, 2021.

Table 9: San Luis Obispo County Commute Patterns
Where Employees In San Luis Obispo County Commute From
Where San Luis Obispo County Residents Commute to

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 52
It is important to note that the data represents a; number of jobs and not the number of people; one person may hold multiple jobs across the study area, however, this is not reflected in the LEHD data.

Another caveat is that the LEHD data does not indicate whether a job is held by a remote worker, however, some remote work patterns can be assumed. For instance, likely, most San Luis Obispo County residents with jobs located in Los Angeles County are working remotely at least part of the time. Even with these caveats, the LEHD data still provides useful information about popular commute patterns that could potentially be served by transit.

Most San Luis Obispo County jobs are held by county residents (68 percent). The San Luis Obispo County communities that supply the greatest number of employees are the Cities of San Luis Obispo (12 percent of county jobs), Paso Robles (9 percent), and Atascadero (9 percent). Notably, 11 percent of San Luis Obispo County jobs are held by residents of Santa Barbara County, and about 6 percent are held by residents of Santa Maria specifically. In the City of San Luis Obispo, 38 percent of jobs held by employed residents are located within the City itself (6,700).

As expected, the majority of San Luis Obispo County residents’ jobs are also within the county (65 percent). Nearly one out of every five positions held by San Luis Obispo County residents are located in the City of San Luis Obispo (19 percent). Other places where large numbers of San Luis Obispo County residents work include Paso Robles (9 percent of jobs held by county residents), Atascadero (7 percent), and Arroyo Grande (3 percent). The top out-of-county location where San Luis Obispo County residents are employed is Santa Barbara County (10 percent of jobs held by San Luis Obispo County residents).

More specifically, 6 percent of jobs held by San Luis Obispo County residents are located in Santa Maria.

According to a study conducted by the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments, the residents commuting south to Santa Barbara County tend to live in Nipomo, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach.6

Considering the number of workers estimated to be traveling in either direction, the LEHD data suggests about 11,000 people are commuting between San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties regularly.

This trip is currently served by RTA Route 10; however, it is important to evaluate whether the RTA 10 schedule can be improved to maximize commuter ridership.

Looking at the potential for transit to serve popular commutes, it is necessary to consider how commuting patterns have changed since the COVID-19 pandemic. The widespread implementation of remote and hybrid work policies in the wake of the pandemic has resulted in many people commuting less frequently in 2024 than in 2019, therefore reducing the need for transit services designed for commuters. This trend was noted in a recent report by the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments, which found through an analysis of Replica data that about 15 percent of Santa Barbara County resident workers were working from home on any given day in 2022, up from 6 percent in 2019.

Interestingly, the same report found that the shift to working from home only occurred for Santa Barabara County residents with an annual income of $75,000 to $100,000 or more. As lower-income workers are more likely to use the bus, this indicates a continued need for transit service for work purposes and Cal poly enrollment.
6 Santa Barbara County Association of Governments. (2023). Understanding Regional Travel Patterns – Draft [PDF].

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 53
The California Polytechnic University (Cal Poly) is a four-year California State University in the City of San Luis Obispo. Cal Poly is a major transit trip generator for both the RTA and SLO Transit, as many students and staff rely on transit for their transportation needs. Cal Poly has had 20,000 to 21,500 full-time equivalent students enrolled during the Fall Quarter since the 2015-16 school year. Cal Poly's historical enrollment, based on the Fall Quarter Census, is shown in Figure 8.

Per the Cal Poly Campus Master Plan (2019), Cal Poly intends to increase the student headcount to 25,000 by 2035, an increase of about 4,000 students compared to 2022. The growing student body will likely drive increased demand for transit services within the City of San Luis Obispo as well as the greater region. Another factor that may influence Cal Poly transit ridership in the future is that Cal Poly is undertaking multiple capital projects that will increase the total number of students living on campus from 8,000 to 15,000 by 2030. This increase in Cal Poly’s on-campus residential capacity will be correlated to an increase in staff to manage the new facilities. The planned shift towards more students living on campus may alter SLO Transit travel patterns in particular, with peak hourly ridership likely changing as a result of more students starting their day on campus.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 54
This page intentionally left blank.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 55
Chapter 6

EVALUATION OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TRANSIT

INTRODUCTION
This chapter evaluates SLO Transit operations and performance. First, ten-year operating trends are discussed. Then, a more detailed performance assessment by service is presented for FY 2022-23.

Additional route-specific data is incorporated into the route profiles included in Appendix C.

In addition to reviewing operations data, LSC solicited public, stakeholder, and bus operator feedback to learn how SLO Transit services are utilized and perceived by both passengers and community members alike, as well as to determine short-term service improvements to help SLO Transit better meet local transportation needs. Input regarding SLO Transit was gathered through an onboard survey, an online community survey, stakeholder meetings, and drop-in bus operator interviews. These efforts are summarized in Appendices D (onboard survey), E (community survey), and F (stakeholder and bus operator input).

SLO TRANSIT TEN-YEAR TRENDS
Two major events influenced SLO Transit operations in the last ten years: the COVID-19 pandemic and the nationwide bus operator shortage. In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted many businesses and schools to institute remote work policies to encourage people to comply with regional stay-at-home orders. The widespread adoption of remote work/school policies caused SLO Transit ridership to plummet, and this ridership decline in turn caused SLO Transit to reduce service levels.

In the years since the COVID-19 pandemic, many bus operators have either retired or left their positions in pursuit of higher-paying roles with less public exposure. This trend has resulted in a nationwide bus operator shortage. Locally, the high cost of living in San Luis Obispo County and the City of San Luis Obispo has limited the number of potential bus operators even further. The bus operator shortage has made it incredibly difficult for SLO Transit to resume pre-pandemic service levels.

Operations
SLO Transit's ten-year (FY 2013-14 through FY 2022-23) operations data are shown in Table 10. The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and bus operator shortage are evident in the data; SLO Transit ridership declined significantly in FY 2019-20 as local businesses and schools, including Cal Poly, moved to remote formats. While most businesses and schools are operating in-person once again as of 2024, SLO Transit has not returned to pre-pandemic service levels due to several factors, including staffing levels and lower ridership.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 56
Ridership
SLO Transit ridership for FY 2013-14 through FY 2022-23 is shown in Table 10 and Figure 9. Of the ten years considered, ridership peaked in FY 2015-16 at 1,209,707 passenger-trips. Ridership had already been declining from this peak before the pandemic, decreasing by 19 percent from FY 2015-16 to FY 2018-19. This pre-pandemic transit ridership decline was a trend observed nationwide and can be attributed to factors such as low fuel costs and low interest rates that made it easier for many people to purchase and use personal vehicles. This ridership decline was then exacerbated by the pandemic; from FY 2018-19 to FY 2020-21, SLO Transit ridership decreased by 82 percent.

SLO Transit ridership has slowly recovered since the lows experienced during the pandemic.

Systemwide, SLO Transit served 515,002 passenger-trips in FY 2022-23, an increase of 186 percent over FY 2020-21. Figure 10 shows how the recovery of ridership has varied by service by year. As shown, the SLO Transit routes that serve Cal Poly (Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B) have seen the greatest growth in ridership since the pandemic. This growth can be attributed to the large number of students who ride these services; ridership decreased when Cal Poly shifted to primarily remote instruction in the spring of 2020 and subsequently increased when Cal Poly returned to primarily in-person instruction during the 2021-22 school year. Ridership recovery on Routes 1B and 2B has been less consistent due to multiple service reductions resulting from the bus operator shortage.

Table 10: SLO Transit Operations - FY 2013-14 - FY 2022-23 Fiscal Year
PassengerTripsLocal
Revenue
2013-14 1,142,749 32,983 399,892 $3,235,378 $650,800
2014-15 1,099,547 33,016 396,269 $3,445,334 $656,115
2015-16 1,209,707 33,963 412,377 $3,450,953 $721,541
2016-17 1,131,879 34,698 437,145 $3,701,634 $702,644
2017-18 945,288 37,535 382,799 $3,532,310 $771,861
2018-19 981,995 39,599 441,483 $3,533,504 $703,061
2019-20 715,383 32,882 372,376 $3,283,817 $643,776
2020-21 179,456 29,994 330,124 $3,116,232 $323,759
2021-22 468,945 28,144 330,244 $3,348,735 $710,758
2022-23 515,002 30,870 343,103 $4,252,122 $742,743
% Change
FY 13-14 to FY 22-23
-55% -6% -14% 31% 14%
Source: National Transit Database
Service Parameters
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Operating
Costs

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 57

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 58
Service Levels
From FY 2013-14 to FY 2018-19, SLO Transit annual service levels increased, with the number of vehicle service hours increasing by 20 percent and the number of vehicle service miles increasing by 10 percent.

These increases can be attributed to service changes implemented as a result of recommendations made in the 2016 update of the SLO Transit SRTP, including changes to the routing structure.

SLO Transit service levels have been lower in the years since the pandemic due to service reductions resulting from low ridership and the bus operator shortage. In particular, San Luis Tripper, Highland Tripper, and Route 6x operations have been suspended since the pandemic, and the Old SLO Trolley only resumed operations in FY 2023-24. As of FY 2022-23, SLO Transit vehicle service hours have decreased by 6 percent from FY 2013-14 and by 22 percent from FY 2018-19. SLO Transit vehicle service miles have decreased by 14 percent from FY 2013-14 and by 22 percent from FY 2018-19.

Operating Costs
SLO Transit’s operating costs increased from $3.24 million in FY 2013-14 to $4.25 million in FY 2022-23 (+31 percent). Operating costs first increased by 9 percent from FY 2013-14 to FY 2018-19, then costs rapidly increased by 20 percent from FY 2018-19 to FY 2022-23. The significant increase in costs observed over the last 5 years in particular is largely due to record-high inflation and the need to offer competitive job offers to recruit more employees. However, it is worth noting that the consumer price index (CPI) increased by a similar amount (30 percent) during this ten-year time period, indicating SLO Transit operating costs have not increased much more than inflation.

Local Revenues
SLO Transit’s local revenues, which include passenger fares and funding from Cal Poly, increased by 14 percent over the last ten years, growing from $650,800 in FY 2013-14 to $742,743 in FY 2022-23.

Revenues declined during the pandemic as a result of the drop in ridership, however, revenues have grown in the years following. Of the ten years considered, SLO Transit’s local revenues peaked in FY 2018-19 at $771,861.

Performance
The SLO Transit's ten-year operating data was used to calculate several performance indicators, detailed in Table 11. Trends evident from the data include:

The number of passenger-trips per vehicle service hour is an indicator of the relative productivity of transit service. This measure decreased by 52 percent over the last 10 years and by 33 percent over the last 5 years.

Passenger-trips per vehicle service mile is another indicator of productivity. This measure decreased by 47 percent over the last 10 years and by 33 percent over the last 5 years.

The operating cost per passenger-trip has increased by 192 percent over the last 10 years.

This measure peaked in FY 2020-21 when the pandemic was in full swing and SLO Transit ridership was at its lowest but has since dropped 52 percent as ridership returned.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 59
The SLO Transit operating cost per vehicle service hour increased by 40 percent over the last 10 years and 54 percent over the last 5 years.

Overall, the ten-year performance trends reflect the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic; SLO Transit ridership decreased, and operating costs increased as a result of the pandemic, causing negative impacts to SLO Transit’s productivity and cost efficiency.

SLO TRANSIT FY 22-23 OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE
Operations
Table 12 details SLO Transit operating data by service for FY 2022-23. The Old SLO Trolley, San Luis Tripper, Highland Tripper, and Route 6x did not operate in FY 2022-23, therefore these services are not included.

Table 11: SLO Transit Performance - FY 2013-14 - FY 2022-23 Fiscal Year Hour Mile
2013-14 34.6 2.9 $2.83 $98.09
2014-15 33.3 2.8 $3.13 $104.35
2015-16 35.6 2.9 $2.85 $101.61
2016-17 32.6 2.6 $3.27 $106.68
2017-18 25.2 2.5 $3.74 $94.11
2018-19 24.8 2.2 $3.60 $89.23
2019-20 21.8 1.9 $4.59 $99.87
2020-21 6.0 0.5 $17.36 $103.90
2021-22 16.7 1.4 $7.14 $118.99
2022-23 16.7 1.5 $8.26 $137.74
% Change
FY 13-14 to FY 22-23
-52% -47% 192% 40%
% Change
FY 18-19 to FY 22-23 -33% -33% 129% 54%
Source: National Transit Database
Performance
Operating Cost per
Passenger-Trip
Passengers Per
Operating Cost per
Service Hour

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 60
Ridership
SLO Transit served 515,002 passenger-trips in FY 2022-23. Route 4A had the greatest ridership, carrying 153,525 passenger-trips, or 30 percent of all annual ridership. Other routes with high ridership included Routes 3A (85,585 passenger-trips), 2A (72,298 passenger-trips), and 4B (68,567 passenger-trips). It should be noted that the generally higher ridership observed on the A routes versus the B routes is due to the A routes operating on more days of the week and for longer hours.

Figure 11 depicts how SLO Transit ridership by passenger-type varied by month. Given that such a large proportion of SLO Transit ridership is comprised of Cal Poly students and staff, SLO Transit ridership fluctuates depending on when Cal Poly is in session; in FY 2022-23, ridership was highest from September through November (Fall Quarter) and January through June (Winter and Spring Quarters).

Ridership clearly dipped when the school had vacations or breaks, such as during the summer months, December, and March. General public ridership stayed relatively consistent throughout the year.

Service Levels
SLO Transit operated 30,870 vehicle service hours and 343,103 vehicle service miles in FY 2022-23. The A Routes required greater service levels due to having longer weekday service spans and operating on weekends. Looking at mileage, Route 3A operated the most vehicle service miles (21 percent of the systemwide total) due to the longer service span, higher service frequency during the school year, and longer route length compared to many of the other SLO Transit routes.

Table 12: SLO Transit Operations by Service - FY 2022-23 Service
PassengerTrips
Route 1A 50,349 5,179 52,857 $572,119
Route 1B 11,452 1,922 20,006 $212,958
Route 2A 72,298 5,208 61,899 $589,598
Route 2B 12,215 1,647 19,175 $185,804
Route 3A 85,585 5,208 71,402 $605,108
Route 3B 53,979 3,016 40,655 $349,290
Route 4A 153,525 5,322 48,625 $578,627
Route 4B 68,567 3,183 26,477 $341,816
Laguna Tripper 7,032 185 2,007 $20,631
Systemwide 515,002 30,870 343,103 $3,455,950
Sources: City of San Luis Obispo, LSC.

Service Parameters
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating Cost

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 61
Operating Costs
To determine the SLO Transit operating cost by service, the FY 2022-23 adopted budget was used to develop an operating cost model. Each SLO Transit operating expense was allocated to the service quantity (vehicle service hours or vehicle service miles) upon which it is most dependent. The costs not dependent on service levels were designated as fixed costs. The costs were then divided by FY 2022-23 service levels to yield the following formula:

FY 2022-23 SLO Transit Operating Cost Model = $93.81 x annual vehicle service hours + $1.63 x annual vehicle service miles +
$796,172 in fixed costs
The cost model was used to calculate the marginal operating costs of each SLO transit route, as shown in Table 12. Overall, the A Routes were more expensive than the B Routes or Laguna Tripper due to the greater service levels. Route 3A was the most expensive SLO Transit service in FY 2022-23 ($605,108) because of the large number of vehicle service hours and miles required for operations. The Laguna Tripper was the least expensive service ($20,631), as the service consisted of only two trips per weekday during the school year.

Performance Analysis
Table 13 and Figures 12 through 14 show FY 2022-23 performance indicators for each SLO Transit service. Important trends to note from the service-specific performance analysis are as follows:

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 62
Table 13: SLO Transit Performance by Service - FY 2022-23 Service Hour Mile
Route 1A 9.7 1.0 $11.36 $110.47
Route 1B 6.0 0.6 $18.60 $110.80
Route 2A 13.9 1.2 $8.16 $113.21
Route 2B 7.4 0.6 $15.21 $112.81
Route 3A 16.4 1.2 $7.07 $116.19
Route 3B 17.9 1.3 $6.47 $115.81
Route 4A 28.8 3.2 $3.77 $108.72
Route 4B 21.5 2.6 $4.99 $107.39
Laguna Tripper 38.0 3.5 $2.93 $111.52
Systemwide 16.7 1.5 $6.71 $111.95
Sources: City of San Luis Obispo, LSC.

Performance
Marginal Operating Cost
per Passenger-Trip
Passengers Per Marginal Operating Cost
per Service Hour

SLO RTA and SLO Transit 2024 SRTPs LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO RTA and SLO Transit Page 63

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 64
Systemwide, SLO Transit served 16.7 passenger-trips per vehicle service hour in FY 2022-23.

The most productive routes, based on this metric, were the Laguna Tripper (38.0 passengertrips per hour), Route 4A (28.8), and Route 4B (21.5), three services that are all highly utilized by students. The least productive routes were Routes 1B (6.0 passenger-trips per hour) and 2B (7.4).

SLO Transit carried 1.5 passenger-trips per vehicle service mile in FY 2022-23. The Laguna Tripper, Route 4A, and Route 4B all served more passenger-trips per vehicle service mile than the systemwide total. Considering this performance measure, Routes 1B (0.6 passenger-trips per mile) and 2B (0.6) were also the least productive services.

The SLO Transit FY 2022-23 marginal operating cost per passenger-trip was $6.71. The Laguna Tripper was the most cost-efficient service ($2.93 per passenger-trip), followed by Route 4A ($3.77) and Route 4B ($4.99). The most expensive service per passenger-trip was Route 1B ($18.60), followed by Route 2B ($15.21) and Route 1A ($11.26).

The marginal operating cost per vehicle service hour was similar across the various SLO Transit services, ranging from $107.39 on Route 4B to a high of $116.19 on Route 3A.

Generally, this measure was lower on the low-mileage routes (Routes 4 A/B, 1 A/B, and the Laguna Tripper) and higher on the high-mileage routes (Routes 3 A/B and 2 A/B).

In sum, the SLO Transit services which are catered to Cal Poly and local K-12 students (Routes 3 A/B, 4 A/B, and the Laguna Tripper) were more productive and cost-efficient compared to other services.

On-Time Performance
LSC recorded SLO Transit's on-time performance by service during October 2023 as a part of the greater onboard passenger survey effort conducted for the SRTP (Appendix D). Figure 15 shows the proportion of timepoint stops that were early, on-time, 6 to 10 minutes late, 11 to 15 minutes late, or more than 15 minutes late as measured by what time the bus departed from established timepoints. The on-time performance data shown was collected during the equivalent of one weekday of service, so the data reflects a limited number of runs.

Based on the data collected by LSC, Routes 1A, 4A, 4B, and the Laguna Tripper had the best on-time performance, as they were on-time for 80 percent or more of the timepoint stops. Routes 1A and 1B left the timepoints early more frequently than any other services. Route 2A (65 percent) and the Old SLO Trolley (54 percent) had the largest proportions of timepoints for which the bus left late. Routes 2A (40 percent), 3A (34 percent), and 3B (21 percent) had the largest proportions of timepoints for which the bus left more than 15 minutes late. While this data is based on limited runs, it suggests that on-time performance is a challenge for SLO Transit, especially on Routes 2 A/B and 3 A/B. On-time performance is an important aspect of service quality and reliability, therefore the SLO Transit SRTP will consider service modifications to improve on-time performance.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 65

FINDINGS
During the last ten years, SLO Transit operations and performance were significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as by the subsequent nationwide bus operator shortage and rise in inflation. SLO Transit ridership declined during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the widespread implementation of remote work and school structures across the region, including at Cal Poly. SLO Transit reduced service levels in response to the reduced demand, however, the shortage of bus operators has made it difficult to reinstate pre-COVID service levels. Multiple years of high inflation rates also resulted in SLO Transit operating costs increasing at a rapid rate.

Since the peak of the pandemic in FY 2020-21, SLO Transit systemwide performance has slowly improved with the return of both local and Cal Poly ridership. In FY 2022-23, SLO Transit served 515,002 passenger-trips. Productivity increased to 16.7 passenger-trips per vehicle service hour and 1.5 passenger-trips per vehicle service mile. The best-performing SLO Transit services in FY 2022-23, in terms of productivity and cost-efficiency, were Routes 4A/B, Routes 3A/B, and the Laguna Tripper. In regard to on-time performance, Routes 1A, 4A, 4B, and the Laguna Tripper were the best performing.

Looking forward, it is likely that more than minor service modifications will be needed to increase SLO Transit ridership to the levels necessary to achieve the City of San Luis Obispo’s adopted goal of a 12 percent transit mode split. The analyses presented in this Chapter highlight service inefficiencies that should be addressed to increase the reliability and utility of the service for both existing passengers as well as potentially new passengers. The public and stakeholder input summarized in Appendices C, D, and E provides additional insight beyond the analyses presented in this Chapter about how SLO Transit could potentially improve to further attract discretionary ridership.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 66
This page intentionally left blank.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 67
Chapter 7

SLO TRANSIT SERVICE ALTERNATIVES

INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, service alternatives for SLO Transit are presented. The alternatives are based on public input and the recommendations of related studies, including the recent SLO Transit Innovations (Transit Innovations) Study (2024). Given the City’s goal of achieving a 7 percent transit mode split by 2030 and 12 percent transit mode split by 2035, many of the service alternatives are designed to increase ridership. Each alternative is evaluated as a stand-alone option in this chapter; the combined impacts of the recommended plan elements will be detailed in the Draft SLO Transit SRTP.

The following discussion of SLO Transit service alternatives is organized by the type of change proposed.

Changes to service frequency are discussed first, followed by potential changes to service hours. Then, options for introducing microtransit service to San Luis Obispo are presented, followed by routing alternatives. The various alternatives are then compared using the new performance standards recommended in WP2. For each alternative, the impacts on ridership and operating costs are estimated.

Ridership and cost estimates assume implementation in FY 2025-26 and are based on the following parameters:

1. The projected SLO Transit FY 2025-26 operating budget, as presented in the City of San Luis Obispo 2023-25 Financial Plan Supplement, was used to estimate the operating costs of each existing service assuming no change to service levels (“status quo” scenario). The per-hour and per-mile costs were then used to estimate the cost impacts of the various alternatives, per the following equation:

Change in SLO Transit Marginal Operating Cost = $50.22 X Change in Vehicle Service Hours + $2.23 X Change in Vehicle Service Miles
For the alternatives evaluations which follow, operating cost estimates represent “marginal” costs. In other words, fixed costs are excluded from the analysis unless identified specifically.

The reason for looking at marginal costs of potential changes or improvements is that fixed costs (such as administrative staff salaries, utilities, and supplies) will not change if service levels are increased or decreased. However, fuel/maintenance costs (cost per mile) and driver salary costs (costs per hour) will increase incrementally as vehicle hours and miles are increased. Fixed costs and capital costs will be included in the discussion when the Draft Financial Plan is prepared.

2. Ridership estimates are based on projected full-year SLO Transit FY 2023-24 ridership, expected population growth in San Luis Obispo County during the next two years, ridership data from peer systems, and standard transit demand elasticity factors, depending on the alternative.

Elasticity is an economic term which measures the change in behavior of one variable in response to the change in a related variable. For example, if service levels are doubled, historical data has shown that ridership will not double, but rather increase by around 47 percent.

Elasticity factors vary for different variables such as headways, total travel time or transfer time.

Variation has also been found in urban areas vs. suburban areas or during peak or non-peak periods. The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 95 Traveler Response to

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 68
Transportation System Changes Chapter 9 – Transit Scheduling and Frequency is a good resource for transit elasticity factors.

3. Service was assumed to include 180 academic year weekdays, 81 non-academic year weekdays, 52 Saturdays/holidays, and 52 Sundays, unless otherwise noted.

4. The assumed average cash fares received per boarding on each route are shown in Table 14. The average cash fare values were calculated by dividing the total annual cash fare revenue received on the route during FY 2022-23 by total annual boardings. The average cash fare estimates do not account for fees received from Cal Poly.

SERVICE FREQUENCY ALTERNATIVES
The Transit Innovations Study recommended increasing service frequency to improve service quality and increase ridership. Additionally, more frequent service was one of the most requested improvements during the onboard passenger survey (42 percent of respondents), corroborating that improving service frequency would likely benefit SLO Transit ridership. This section considers alternatives to increase SLO Transit service frequency. The options discussed demonstrate the wide range of potential impacts that can result from increasing service frequency to differing extents. The service frequency alternatives are summarized in Table 15.

Table 14 : SLO Transit Average Cash Fare per Boarding by Route FY 2022-23
Boardings Cash Fares
Average Cash
Fare per Boarding
Route 1A 50,349 $51,823.37 $1.03
Route 1B 11,452 $9,381.51 $0.82
Route 2A 72,298 $72,317.92 $1.00
Route 2B 12,215 $12,348.40 $1.01
Route 3A 85,585 $27,594.63 $0.32
Route 3B 53,979 $14,563.33 $0.27
Route 4A 153,525 $11,662.94 $0.08
Route 4B 68,567 $4,780.27 $0.07
Laguna Tripper 7,032 $2,048.69 $0.29
Systemwide 515,002 $206,521 $0.40
Source: SLO Transit

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 69
Table 15: SLO Transit - Service Frequency and Span Alternatives Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating
Cost
Cash Fare
Revenues 2
Operating
Subsidy
Status Quo1
Route 1A 55,900 5,300 50,700 $379,100 $57,500 $321,600
Route 1B 20,000 3,100 29,900 $222,300 $16,400 $205,900
Route 2A 80,300 5,300 57,900 $395,100 $80,300 $314,800
Route 2B 22,100 3,100 33,200 $229,600 $22,300 $207,300
Route 3A 94,700 6,300 82,400 $499,900 $30,500 $469,400
Route 3B 65,700 4,900 61,700 $383,500 $17,700 $365,800
Route 4A 152,800 5,500 47,800 $382,600 $11,600 $371,000 Route 4B 70,900 4,000 31,000 $269,900 $4,900 $265,000
Laguna Tripper 10,100 200 2,000 $14,500 $2,900 $11,600
Old SLO Trolley 1,600 300 1,800 $19,100 $600 $18,500
System Total 574,100 38,000 398,400 $2,795,600 $244,700 $2,550,900 Service Frequency and Span Alternatives - Change from Status Quo 3 Increase Route 4 Frequency During Academic Year
Increase Route 4A Frequency - 8:00 AM - 10:00 AM 4,200 300 2,300 $20,200 $300 $19,900 1 Increase Route 4B Frequency - 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM 3,900 300 2,100 $19,700 $300 $19,400 1 Net Impact (Combined 4A and 4B) 8,100 600 4,400 $39,900 $600 $39,300 1 Double Service Frequency on Routes 1, 2, 3, 4 (A & B)
Full Service Day, Year-Round 208,300 33,500 347,000 $2,455,000 $83,500 $2,371,500 8 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Weekdays, Year-Round 119,700 19,600 234,200 $1,505,800 $48,000 $1,457,800 8 Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 153,600 20,900 231,700 $1,565,500 $61,600 $1,503,900 8 Double Service Frequency on Rts 1A, 2A, 3A, 4A
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 89,600 11,300 133,800 $865,400 $35,900 $829,500 4 Double Service Frequency on Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 101,200 11,600 136,100 $885,600 $40,600 $845,000 4 Extend Weekday Evening Service on A Routes
Extend Service to 12:00 AM - Academic Year 5,100 1,000 10,900 $74,500 $2,000 $72,500 0 Extend Service to 10:00 PM - Non-Academic Year 2,200 700 7,000 $50,700 $900 $49,800 0 Expand Service on B Routes
Operate B Routes on Weekends - 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM 39,600 3,200 46,000 $263,100 $15,900 $247,200 0 Operate 3B and 4B on Weekends 29,400 1,600 25,300 $136,700 $11,800 $124,900 0 Extend Routes 1B and 2B until 10:00 PM -
Weekdays, Academic Year 4,000 1,400 14,500 $102,600 $1,600 $101,000 0 Provide Academic Year Service Levels Year-Round 16,300 2,300 26,400 $174,300 $6,500 $167,800 0 Change in Annual Service
Additional
Buses
Needed
Note 1: Status quo operations are based on FY 2023-24 ridership through 3/31/24 and expected annual population growth. Service estimates are based on FY 2022-23 operating parameters. Cost estimates are based on the projected FY 2025-26 SLO Transit budget and the SLO Transit cost model.

Note 2: The average cash fare per boarding by route is detailed in Table 13.

Note 3: Parameters and costs represent change over existing services. Estimates represent marginal costs and do not include fixed costs.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 70
Increase Route 4 Frequency During Academic Year
Routes 4A and 4B serve northeast San Luis Obispo, connecting downtown and the Cal Poly campus with residential areas along Foothill Boulevard, Highland Drive, and Grand Avenue. Service is operated on a 45-minute loop, using one bus in each direction. Route 4 is the most popular SLO Transit service; Route 4A is projected to provide upwards of 152,000 passenger-trips in FY 2025-26, and Route 4B is projected to provide 70,000 passenger-trips. Increasing service frequency during peak travel periods would likely further benefit ridership and improve connectivity between downtown and Cal Poly.

Increase Route 4A Frequency – 8:00 AM – 10:00 AM
Ridership is quite high on Route 4A (clockwise direction), particularly on the runs departing the Government Center at 8:15 AM, 10:30 AM, and 11:15 AM, all of which were observed to carry more than 50 passengers. Given this high demand, the City could increase service frequency on weekday mornings during the academic year by adding two new runs departing the Government Center at 8:30 AM and 9:15 AM.

Operating the two additional Route 4A runs would increase the City’s marginal operating cost by $20,200 per year. An elasticity analysis based on existing ridership during this service period indicates that ridership would be increased by an estimated 4,200 boardings per year, generating $300 in additional cash fares (not accounting for the fare revenue agreement with Cal Poly). Note that there could be additional ridership generated by potential passengers who currently do not use the existing service due to crowding. This alternative would require an additional peak bus.

Increase Route 4B Frequency – 3:00 PM – 5:00 PM
Route 4B, which operates in the counterclockwise direction, carries particularly high passenger loads on the 4:00 PM and 4:45 PM runs (50 passengers each). Adding two additional runs departing the Government Center at 4:15 PM and 5:00 PM on weekdays in the academic year could expand capacity and improve convenience during the afternoon peak ridership period. The annual marginal operating subsidy for the two runs would be $19,400 per year, based on the increase to service levels and fare revenue. Adding Route 4B service in the afternoon would require an additional peak bus (though this could be the same bus added for the 4A additional runs in the morning). It is estimated the runs would provide 3,900 passenger-trips per year.

Double Service Frequency on All Regular Routes
A more substantial service increase would be to double service frequency on all regular SLO Transit fixed routes (Routes 1 A/B, 2 A/B, 3 A/B, and 4 A/B). At present, SLO Transit service frequencies are relatively low for an urban transit system, consisting of hourly service on Routes 1, 2, and 3 and service every 45 minutes on Route 4. Doubling service would result in bus service every 30 minutes on Routes 1, 2, and 3A and every 22.5 minutes on Route 4. The increase in ridership would help to achieve sustainability goals, including the Transit Innovations Study goal to increase transit mode split to 7 percent by 2030. As discussed below, three options for doubling service frequency were considered.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 71
Full Day, Year-Round
Doubling service frequency on all regular SLO Transit routes for the full-service day, year-round would result in a significant increase to the City’s marginal operating cost; service levels would increase by 33,500 vehicle service hours and 347,000 vehicle service miles per year, requiring $2.45 million in operating funds. Eight additional vehicles would also be needed throughout the entire service day, which would require the City to expand its existing fleet and hire more bus operators. The drastic increase to service frequency would also have a significant impact on ridership, as elasticity analyses indicate that systemwide ridership would grow by 208,300 passenger-trips per year, equal to a 40 percent increase in ridership on Routes 1 through 4.

The additional fleet would also expand the required capacity of the SLO Transit maintenance facility, with regard to bus storage, charging, and maintenance work bays. Accommodating a doubling of frequency could also exceed the capacity of the Downtown Transit Center. At present, the 5-bus capacity of the DTC is adequate to serve the hourly service on Routes 1, 2, and 3 (as well as the other services) by offsetting the “A” buses 30 minutes from the “B” buses. Simply adding new runs 30 minutes off of the existing service times (to provide desirable consistent 30-minute headways) would result in six buses onsite for Routes 1 through 3, as well as up to two buses for Route 4, as well as less frequent buses for the tripper and express services. While the peak number of buses at the DTC could be reduced by changing the schedules for some or all of the additional services, this would result in unbalanced service times and a loss in transfer opportunities.
8:00 AM – 6:00 PM, Weekdays, Year-Round
SLO Transit ridership, like many transit systems, is lower in the early morning and later evening. To ensure the more effective use of resources, the City could double the service frequency from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on weekdays only. This service enhancement would increase service levels by 19,600 vehicle service hours and 234,200 vehicle service miles annually at a marginal operating cost of $1.5 million. To estimate the ridership impact, elasticity analyses for each route on the proportion of ridership that occurs from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM. In sum, doubling service frequency during the weekday daytime hours would increase systemwide ridership by 119,700 passenger-trips per year, equal to a 23 percent increase in ridership on Routes 1 through 4. The implications on capital needs discussed for the first of these options would be the same for this option.

Full Day, Weekdays, Academic Year
Most SLO Transit ridership occurs during the Cal Poly academic year. Another means to double service frequency but concentrate resources during periods of high ridership would be to double service frequency on weekdays during the academic year. Annual service levels would increase by 20,900 vehicle service hours and 231,700 vehicle service miles. Elasticity analyses indicate that annual ridership would increase by 153,600 passenger-trips (a 30 percent increase in total ridership for Routes 1 through 4), therefore the net financial impact would be a $1.56 million increase to the SLO Transit marginal operating subsidy. The capital needs to expand the fleet, fleet facilities and passenger facilities would be the same as discussed for the previous alternatives.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 72
Double Service Frequency on All A Routes, Full Weekdays, Academic Year In consideration of the high operating cost and capital impacts of full doubling of frequency, another option was evaluated that focuses on doubling the frequency of the four “A” routes, leaving the “B” routes unchanged. This has the advantage of providing equitable improvement of service across the SLO Transit service area. This option focuses the service improvement across the full weekday span of service, within the academic year only. Ridership impacts were evaluated based on an elasticity analysis of the A routes only, with a reduction included to reflect the proportion of existing A route ridership that transfers to and from the B routes (based on the onboard survey). This option would require an additional 11,300 vehicle-hours and 133,800 vehicle miles of service annually. Ridership would be increased by 89,800 boardings per year. The total operating subsidy would be increased by $829,500 annually, and four additional buses would need to be operated.

Double Service Frequency on Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, Full Weekdays, Academic Year Another approach to a partial increase in service frequency would be to focus additional service on the two best performing of the four main routes, specifically Routes 3 and 4 (both A and B directions), for the full span of service in the academic year. This option would increase service by 11,600 vehicle-hours and 136,100 vehicle-miles per year. Considering the impact of no availability of direct transfers between Routes 3 and 4 and Routes 1 and 2, ridership would be increased by 101,200 boardings per year.

Operating subsidies would be increased by $845,000 annually, and four additional buses would need to be in operation at peak times.

SPAN OF SERVICE ALTERNATIVES
The next set of SLO Transit alternatives focuses on the “span of service,” or the hours that transit services operate. Passengers requested multiple changes to the SLO Transit span of service during the onboard passenger survey; the most requested service improvements were later evening service (54 percent of respondents), more frequent service (42 percent), additional Saturday service (39 percent), and additional Sunday service (32 percent). The span of service alternatives is also summarized in Table

15. Extend Weekday Evening Service on A Routes
To provide residents with a later-night transit option, two alternatives for extending service on Routes 1A, 2A, 3A, and 4A were considered.

Extend Service to 12:00 AM – Academic Year
Currently, the last departures on weekdays during the academic year on the A Routes occur at 9:15 PM (Routes 1A and 2A), 10:15 PM (Route 3A), and 10:30 (Route 4A), terminating the last runs 45 minutes later. Extending service on all four A Routes until midnight would add Route 1A and Route 2A departures at 10:15 PM and 11:15 PM and Route 3A and 3B departures at 11:15 PM. Based on late evening ridership on transit services at other California universities, this additional service is estimated to increase ridership by 5,100 boardings per year. While it would not require additional vehicles to

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 73
operate, the increase in service hours and miles would result in an increase in operating costs of $74,500 per year.

Extend Service to 10:00 PM – Non-Academic Year
During the non-academic year, the last runs start at 7:15 PM on Routes 1A, 2A, and 3A and 7:30 PM on Route 4A. Extending service until roughly 10:00 PM would require operating two additional runs on Routes 1A, 2A, and 3A, and three additional runs on Route 4A. An evaluation of ridership by hour in the academic versus non-academic year as well as ridership patterns in typical small urban areas indicates that these additional runs would generate 2,200 passenger-trips per year. Annual operating costs would be increased by $50,700. No additional buses would be required.

Expand Service on B Routes
Operate B Routes on Weekends – 7:45 AM – 8:00 PM
The four counterclockwise B routes do not operate on weekends. As a result, service is limited to the large one-way A routes. While the fact that some key corridors are served by more than one A route (such as DTC – Foothill Boulevard or DTC – Madonna Road) still provides some direct bi-directional service, other trips can require a long travel time around the majority of the one-way A loop. As an example, a trip between the DTC and Broad/Santa Barbara requires a 34-minute in-vehicle travel time on Route 4A, compared to only seven minutes when Route 4B is operating. In addition, some stops (such as the Amtrak Station) are served only on B routes and thus do not have any service on weekends.

The reduction in service also effectively reduces the available frequency of service.

Operating all four B routes on Saturdays and Sundays (as well as holidays on which weekend service is provided) would incur an annual operating cost of $263,100. An evaluation of the weekday versus weekend ridership on the A routes during the same service span as well as the existing weekday B ridership by route indicates that overall ridership would increase by 39,600 passenger-trips per year.

Note that no additional buses would be required to provide this service expansion.

Operate Routes 3B and 4B on Weekends
Another option would be to focus the additional B Route weekend service on Routes 3 and 4, which have the highest ridership. This would result in an annual marginal operating cost increase of $136,700 and an increase in annual ridership of 29,400. This option performs the best out of all the weekend options.

Extend Routes 1B and 2B until 10:00 PM – Weekdays, Academic Year While Routes 3A and 4B provide departures up until 10:00 PM on weekdays during the academic year, the last Route 1B and Route 2B departures of the day currently are provided at 5:45 PM, reducing the convenience of transit services for the southern portions of San Luis Obispo by increasing travel times, reducing frequency and eliminating service to some stops. Consistent B route service could be provided

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 74
throughout the city by operating an additional 4 daily trips of Routes 1B and 2B on academic weekdays, with the last departures at 9:45 PM.

An analysis of ridership on existing services on weekday evenings during the academic year indicates that operating these additional runs would serve approximately 4,000 additional passenger-trips per year. While additional buses would not be required, annual operating costs would be increased by $102,600 annually.

Provide Existing Academic Year Span of Service Year Round Cal Poly administration has indicated plans to expand class offerings and associated student activity levels in the summer. While specific details have yet to be defined, it is worthwhile to evaluate the cost and baseline ridership impacts of providing the same span and level of service currently offered in the academic year over the entire year. This would increase annual vehicle-hours by approximately 2,400 and annual vehicle-miles by approximately 26,400. Baseline additional ridership is estimated based on existing average productivity in the non-academic year (7.1 passenger-trips per vehicle service hour), yielding a total increase of 16,300. Note that there may be additional increases in ridership generated by an increase in summer Cal Poly activity. Overall, annual operating costs would be increased by $174,300. No additional fleet would be required. This option also has the benefit of providing more consistent year-round driver schedules, which has the potential to increase driver retention.

ROUTING AND MICROTRANSIT ALTERNATIVES
Another set of alternatives were considered regarding route realignments and the provision of microtransit service. These alternatives are summarized in Table 16.

Implement Evening Microtransit Pilot in Southeast San Luis Obispo Microtransit is a relatively new form of demand response public transit. Through the use of technology and phone apps, it is possible for a passenger to request a ride “on-demand” within certain areas and certain times. The benefit of microtransit is that it is not limited to a set route with set stops, but rather passengers can be picked up at their curb and dropped off at the curb of their destination. This allows homes on the outlying edges of neighborhoods to be served more directly. The disadvantage of microtransit is that if there is high demand for service, there could be a 30-minute or longer wait for a ride. Passengers who depend on public transit to travel to work or appointments at specific times may find microtransit less convenient.

Microtransit has been successful in areas that are not easily served by a fixed route, low productive fixed routes or during the evenings and weekends, when there is less demand. Generally, SLO Transit Routes are very productive and therefore, it is not cost effective to replace the fixed routes with on-demand microtransit. However, the option of microtransit in the evening, when demand is typically lower, was explored.

As part of this alternative, replacing Route 1A with microtransit service between the hours of 7 PM and 9 PM on a year-round basis was reviewed. Currently, Route 1B ends service at 6:30 PM. Therefore, hourly service is only available in the clockwise direction between 7 PM and 9 PM. Routes 1A and 1B

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 75
serve residences in southeast San Luis Obispo as well as the San Luis Airport. Figure 16 presents an example microtransit service area.

In order to serve the level of transit demand currently seen on Route 1A during the evening hours, two vehicles would be needed to provide service between 7 PM and 9 PM and only one vehicle would be needed during the 9 PM hour. This would cost an additional $33,600 annually in operating costs (including the costs of the annual technology license). As SLO Transit does not currently have small vehicles in its fleet, two vans would also need to be procured to operate this service.

Given the fact that curb to curb service would be available, around 250 more homes could be served directly with microtransit than with the fixed route. Therefore, there would be a small increase in ridership over the existing Route 1A evening ridership by around 100 trips per year. As development progresses along Tank Farm Road, this microtransit service area could be expanded. However, as demand for service increases, another vehicle would be required, further increasing costs.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 76

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 77
Implement Late Night Microtransit Pilot - Academic Year Microtransit could be more widely applied to the entire city as a “Late Night” service. SLO Transit services are not available past 11 PM and only Routes 3 and 4 operate this late during the academic year. The general geographic extent of a potential city-wide late night microtransit service area is displayed in Figure 17. As part of this alternative, microtransit would be available between 10 PM and midnight during the academic year. In order to maintain a reasonable level of cost, this alternative assumes that three vans would be used for an annual operating cost of $122,800 if service is provided only on weekdays during the academic year and $160,600 if service is provided 7 days a week during the academic year (only two peak vehicles would be required). Ridership was estimated by reviewing ridership by hour on other microtransit services. For the weekday scenario around 4,700 trips are estimated. If late night microtransit were operated 7 days/week, roughly 7,100 trips could be carried.

If implemented, this should be a one-to-two-year pilot program. Again, three vans would need to be procured, if the current contractor is used. Alternatively, some areas have had success in procuring a separate contractor who specializes in microtransit to operate as a “turnkey” service. Under this scenario, the City would not have to purchase new vehicles or the microtransit software, as it would be included in the total cost of the contract.

Reinstate Route 6X
Prior to COVID, Route 6X was operated on Thursday evenings during the academic year, connecting the Cal Poly Campus with the Downtown Transit Center on Thursday evenings (which the Farmers Market is in operation) from 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM. One bus was used to operate a loop route every half hour.

Ridership averaged 2,600 passenger-trips per year. Considering the historic ridership and the changes in overall transit ridership since 2020, a reinstated service is estimated to serve 2,200 passenger-trips per year. The annual operating cost would be relatively modest, at $7,200 annually.

Reinstate SLO Tripper
Prior to the pandemic, the SLO Tripper route consisted of 2 AM and 2 PM runs per school day connecting the Transit Center with SLO High School. If this route were reinstated, the current operating cost would be $18,500 per year. San Luis Coastal Unified School District data indicates that the High School enrollment has increased by 3 percent since 2019. Applying this factor to the 2019 ridership, this service would carry approximately 7,100 passenger-trips per year and require an operating cost of $17,200. An additional bus would need to be operated.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 78

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 79
Table 16: SLO Transit - Routing and Microtransit Alternatives Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating
Cost
Cash Fare
Revenues 3
Operating
Subsidy
Status Quo1
Route 1A 55,900 5,300 50,700 $379,100 $57,500 $321,600
Route 1B 20,000 3,100 29,900 $222,300 $16,400 $205,900
Route 2A 80,300 5,300 57,900 $395,100 $80,300 $314,800
Route 2B 22,100 3,100 33,200 $229,600 $22,300 $207,300
Route 3A 94,700 6,300 82,400 $499,900 $30,500 $469,400
Route 3B 65,700 4,900 61,700 $383,500 $17,700 $365,800
Route 4A 152,800 5,500 47,800 $382,600 $11,600 $371,000 Route 4B 70,900 4,000 31,000 $269,900 $4,900 $265,000
Laguna Tripper 10,100 200 2,000 $14,500 $2,900 $11,600
Old SLO Trolley 1,600 300 1,800 $19,100 $600 $18,500
System Total 574,100 38,000 398,400 $2,795,600 $244,700 $2,550,900 Routing and Microtransit Alternatives - Change from Status Quo2 Implement Evening Microtransit Pilot in Southeast SLO 4 7:00 PM - 10:00 PM, Weekdays, Year-Round 100 500 8,800 $33,600 $200 $33,400 2 Implement Late Night Microtransit Pilot - Weekdays, Academic Year 4 10:00 PM - 12:00 AM, Weekdays, Academic Year 4,700 1,400 17,500 $122,800 $11,100 $111,700 3 10:00 PM - 12:00 AM, 7 Days/Week, Academic Year 7,100 1,700 21,625 $160,600 $11,100 $149,500 3 Reinstate Route 6X 2,200 100 1,000 $7,200 $900 $6,300 1 Reinstate SLO Tripper 7,100 280 1,430 $17,200 $2,800 $14,400 1 Reinstate Highland Tripper 6,600 230 2,430 $17,000 $2,600 $14,400 1 Revise Routes 1 and 3 in Downtown SLO
Route 1A 3,200 0 1,600 $3,500 $3,300 $200 0
Route 1B 3,600 0 -600 -$1,400 $3,000 -$4,400 0
Route 3A 6,900 0 0 $0 $2,200 -$2,200 0
Route 3B 4,000 0 -3,500 -$7,700 $1,100 -$8,800 0
Total 17,700 0 -2,500 -$5,600 $9,600 -$15,200 0
Note 4: Assumes a general microtransit fare of $4.00 per one-way trip, or an average fare of $2.36 per passenger. Costs include $4,500/year for app license for one vehicle.

Change in Annual Service(2)
Additional
Vehicles
Needed
2022-23 operating parameters. Cost estimates are based on the projected FY 2025-26 SLO Transit budget and the SLO Transit cost model.

Note 2: Parameters and costs represent change over existing services. Estimates represent marginal costs and do not include fixed costs.

Note 3: The average cash fare per boarding by route is detailed in Table 13.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 80
Reinstate Highland Tripper
An additional tripper that has not been operated since the pandemic is the Highland Tripper. This is a short loop route connecting the Cal Poly campus with the housing areas to the west with three roundtrips per school day, and provides additional capacity and service times in the peak AM travel period.

Considering the previous ridership and the overall change in Cal Poly ridership since the pandemic, this service would currently carry roughly 6,600 annual passenger-trips. Reinstating this service would increase operating cost needs by $17,000, and would require the operation of an additional bus.

Revised Routes 1 and 3 in Downtown San Luis Obispo
As discussed in Technical Memorandum 3, the on-time performance of Routes 2 and 3 is poor. Over a total of 298 runs observed as part of this study, 65 percent of Route 2A runs were more than 5 minutes behind schedule, along with 49 percent of Route 2B runs, 48 percent of Route 3A runs and 47 percent of Route 3B runs. In addition to adding uncertainty to service times on each route, this low level of dependability results in missed transfers to/from other routes.

The following options were evaluated to potentially reduce running time and improve on-time performance:

Both Route 2A and 2B in the outbound direction could be streamlined somewhat by traveling along Higuera Street between Higuera/Nipomo and Higuera/Pismo, rather than using Nipomo Street and Pismo Street. This would reduce the route length by 0.2 miles and save roughly 1 minute of travel time.

It would eliminate service to two existing stops (Nipomo at Pismo and Pismo at Archer, that serve 6 passenger-trips per day, or approximately 2,000 passengers per year. Given the limited reduction in travel time, this option is not considered further.

In the inbound direction, both Routes 2A and 2B operate a relatively direct route along Marsh Street to Santa Rosa Street, then travel west on Mill and south on Osos to the transit center. A faster option would be to enter US 101 northbound at the Marsh Street interchange and exit at Osos Street, which would reduce running time by approximately 4 minutes. However, existing stops at Marsh/Archer, Marsh/Broad, March/Osos, and Santa Rosa/Higuera would be missed. These stops serve approximately 13 passengers per day, or 6,200 per year (70 percent on Route 2A and 30 percent on Route 2B). As this option would have a substantial impact on existing ridership and would eliminate much of the service between southwest downtown San Luis Obispo and the Transit Center, it is not considered further.

Routes 3A and 3B between the downtown transit center and Higuera Street/South Street both travel along South Street and Santa Barbara Street. Route 3B also serves the Amtrak Station at the end of Santa Rosa Street, while Route 3A travels along Osos Street. Routes could be shortened by using Pismo Street between Santa Rosa Street and Higuera Street on Route 3A and using Marsh Street on Route 3B.

This would reduce Route 3A route length by 0.7 miles and reduce Route 3B route length by 0.9 miles.

Service would be eliminated to 7 stops on Route 3A and 8 stops on Route 3B. Total ridership at these stops is currently roughly 31 passengers per day or 7,600 per year, evenly split between the two individual routes. However, given the slower running speeds in downtown compared with High Street and the southern portion of Santa Barbara Street, only roughly 1 minute of travel time would be saved in each direction. This option is not considered further, given the substantial impact on ridership and limited benefit to running time.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 81
Another option would be to reroute Routes 3A and 3B onto US 101 between the Downtown Transit Center and the Madonna Street interchange and shift Routes 1A and 1B onto the exiting Routes 3A/3B routes between Broad Street/High Street and the Downtown Transit Center. This would reduce the running time of Route 3A by roughly 5 minutes and Route 3B by roughly 7 minutes, which would significantly improve the on-time performance of Routes 3A and 3B.

Service would be fully eliminated from only a total of four existing stops. Setting aside those stops within a quarter mile walk of other remaining stops, those stops that lose all convenient service consists of the following:

Broad at Islay (Route 1A)
Broad at Leff (Route 1B)
South at King W (Route 3A)
South at King W (Route 3B)
The stops along Broad Street on Routes 1A/1B in total currently serve 2 passenger-trips per day or 800 per year, while the stops along South Street on Routes 3A/3B currently serve 7 passenger trips per day or 1,000 per year, for a total of 9 daily trips and 1,800 annual trips.

This realignment option would also reduce service between the downtown Transit Center and central downtown San Luis Obispo by rerouting Route 1 out of the area. However, as the current Route 1 schedule is very close to the Route 2 schedule in both directions, this would not significantly reduce the convenience of transit service. This option would also reduce the travel times between southwest San Luis Obispo and the Downtown Transit Center. Improving the dependability of Route 3A/3B would also improve the connections to other routes at the Transit Center. Running times on Route 1A/1B are not expected to change significantly; while the revised Route 1A is 0.3 miles longer than at present, it would avoid congestion in the lower downtown area.

As shown in Table 16, this strategy would not change vehicle-hours of service but would reduce annual vehicle-miles by 2,500. Ridership impact was estimated based on the ridership change associated with improvements in dependability, the changes in in-vehicle travel time, the loss of ridership at the four stops with elimination of service, as well as the shift in existing Routes 3A/3B ridership to Routes 1A/1B.

Overall, annual ridership is estimated to increase by a total of 17,700 passenger boardings per year.

Considering the operating costs savings generated by the reduction in mileage plus the additional passenger revenues, the net operating subsidy would be reduced by $15,200 per year. No additional buses would be required.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF SLO TRANSIT SERVICE ALTERNATIVES To evaluate the relative performance of the alternatives above, key impacts of each alternative were compared. The change from the status quo ridership, marginal operating cost, passengers carried per vehicle hour, and marginal operating cost per passenger were compared. This evaluation gives insight regarding the relative advantages and disadvantages of the alternatives. Table 17 and Figures 18-20 show the relative performance of the service alternatives. The green highlight in Table 17 indicates alternatives which meet performance standards developed as part of this transit plan.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 82
Ridership
The impact of the various alternatives on annual ridership is shown in Figure 18. As indicated, the alternatives vary widely, ranging from very little change in ridership associated with providing evening microtransit service in southeast San Luis Obispo (replacing Route 1 service) up to 208,300 passengertrips per year generated by doubling service throughout the year across the operating day. Excluding the options of doubling frequency, the greatest ridership increase is generated by operating the B routes on weekend days (39,600) followed by operating just Route 3B and 4B on weekends (29,400) and revising Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo (17,700).

Table 17: SLO Transit - Service Alternatives Performance Analysis Annual
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Annual Marginal
Operating Cost 1
Passenger-Trips
per Vehicle
Service Hour
Marginal Op.

Cost per
Passenger-Trip
Increase Route 4 A/B Frequency During Academic Year
Increase Route 4A Frequency - 8:00 AM - 10:00 AM 4,200 300 2,300 $20,200 14.0 $4.81 Increase Route 4B Frequency - 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM 3,900 300 2,100 $19,700 13.0 $5.05 Double Service Frequency on Routes 1, 2, 3, 4 (A & B)
Full Service Day, Year-Round 208,300 33,500 347,000 $2,455,000 6.2 $11.79 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Weekdays, Year-Round 119,700 19,600 234,200 $1,505,800 6.1 $12.58 Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 153,600 20,900 231,700 $1,565,500 7.3 $10.19 Double Service Frequency on Routes 1, 2, 3, 4 (A Only)
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 89,600 11,300 133,800 $865,400 7.9 $9.66 Double Service Frequency on Routes 3, 4 (A & B)
Full Service Day, Weekdays, Academic Year 101,200 11,600 136,100 $885,600 8.7 $8.75 Extend Weekday Evening Service on A Routes
Extend Service to 12:00 AM - Academic Year 5,100 1,000 10,900 $74,500 5.1 $14.61 Extend Service to 10:00 PM - Non-Academic Year 2,200 700 7,000 $50,700 3.1 $23.05 Expand Service on B Routes
Operate B Routes on Weekends Year Round - 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM 39,600 3,200 46,000 $263,100 12.4 $6.64 Operate 3B and 4B on Weekends 29,400 1,600 25,300 $136,700 18.4 $4.65 Extend Routes 1B and 2B until 10:00 PM -
Weekdays, Academic Year 4,000 1,400 14,500 $102,600 2.9 $25.65 Provide Academic Year Service Levels Year-Round 16,300 2,300 26,400 $174,300 7.1 $10.69 Implement Evening Microtransit Service in SE SLO 100 500 8,800 $33,600 0.20 $336.00 Implement Late Night Microtransit - Weekdays 4,700 1,400 17,500 $122,800 3.4 $26.13 Implement Late Night Microtransit - 7 days/week 7,100 1,700 21,625 $160,600 4.2 $22.62 Reinstate Route 6X 2,200 100 1,000 $7,200 22.0 $3.27
Reinstate SLO Tripper 7,100 280 1,430 $17,200 25.4 $2.42 Reinstate Highland Tripper 6,600 230 2,430 $17,000 28.7 $2.58 Revise Routes 1 and 3 in Downtown SLO 17,700 0 -2,500 -5,600 NA -$0.32 Recommended
Performance
Standards

11.5 $11.23
Note 1: Does not include fixed costs
Net Impact
Alternatives meeting performance standards shaded in green. Note that alternatives meet standards by increasing ridership at a greater rate than costs, eliminating a service not meeting standards, or increasing ridership while decreasing costs.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 83

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 84

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 85
Marginal Operating Cost
Similar to the ridership impacts, the impact on annual marginal operating costs also varies widely, as shown in Figure 19. At the high end, the full doubling of transit service across all service periods over the year would increase operating costs by $2.45 Million, while limiting the doubling of service frequency to the academic year would cost $1.56 Million, and limiting to daytime hours through the full year would cost $1.5 Million. Doubling frequency on just the A Routes or Routes 3 and 4 (both A and B) would cost in the order of $865,400 and $885,600, respectively.

On the other end, revising Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo would yield a small overall reduction in annual operating costs of $6,100. Beyond doubling frequency, other service alternatives that are relatively costly are operating B routes on weekends ($263,100), implementing late-night microtransit service ($122,800), and operating Routes 1B and 2B on weekday evenings in the academic year ($102,600).

Passenger-Trips per Vehicle Service Hour
A standard measure of the productivity of a transit service is the passenger-trips served per vehicle-hour of service. As shown in Figure 20, the “best” alternative by this measure is reinstating Highland Tripper, which would serve 28.7 passenger-trips per vehicle-hour. This is followed by reinstating the SLO Tripper and Route 6X. Operating Route 3B and 4B on Weekends (18.4), increasing Route 4A morning frequency in the academic year (14.0), increasing Route 4B afternoon frequency in the academic year (13.0), and operating the B routes on weekends (12.4) all meet productivity standards. The options that double service frequency range from 6.1 to 8.7 passengers per vehicle service hour, with the most productive being doubling service on Routes 3 and 4 in the academic year only. The worst option by this measure is replacing evening Route 1 service with microtransit, which adds vehicle-hours but is not forecast to change ridership very much. Note that the revision of Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo cannot be evaluated by this measure, as the number of vehicle-hours is not changed.

As discussed in Working Paper 2, the standard for this measure is a minimum of 11.5 passenger-trips per vehicle service hour. Those alternatives that meet this standard are reinstating Route 6X, Highland Tripper, and SLO Tripper, increasing Route 4A frequency in the morning during the academic year, increasing Route 4B frequency in late afternoons during the academic year, and operating the B routes on weekends year-round, particularly 3B and 4B.

Marginal Operating Cost per Passenger-Trip
A final performance measure is the marginal operating cost per passenger-trip. This is a good measure of the financial performance of the various alternatives, with the better alternatives indicated by a lower value. Figure 21 indicates the “best” alternative by this measure is the revision of Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo, which saves $0.32 for every additional passenger-trip served (as it reduces costs while increasing ridership). At the other extreme, replacing Route 1 in the evening with microtransit requires a $357 per new trip served, followed by implementing late night microtransit service ($26.13), followed by Route 1B and 2B service until 10 PM ($25.65). Considering the standard of no more than $11.23 per passenger-trip, those that achieve the standard consist of:

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 86
x Routes 1 and 3 revisions in downtown San Luis Obispo
x Reinstating pre-COVID services such as Route 6X, Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper x Increasing Route 4A frequency in the mornings during the academic year x Increasing Route 4B frequency in the late afternoons in the academic year x Operating the B routes on weekends year-round, 3B and 4B in particular x Doubling frequency on all routes for a full-service day, weekdays, during the academic year x Doubling frequency on the A routes for a full-service day, weekdays, during the academic year x Doubling frequency on Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B for a full-service day, weekdays during the academic year.
x Provide academic year service levels year-round

ADDITIONAL SERVICE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
As a result of input received from the San Luis Obispo City Council, additional service alternatives were analyzed.

New Developments
There are two major projects currently under development in the southern portion of San Luis Obispo that merit consideration for expanded transit service.

San Luis Ranch
At full buildout, the San Luis Ranch development along Madonna Road will include a total of 604 dwelling units. This includes 299 high-density housing units, 34 affordable housing units, and 83 medium-density units, all of which have a higher potential to generate transit ridership. The higherdensity residential development is concentrated along Madonna Road and is already served by SLO Transit. Under an agreement with Cal Poly, up to 300 students will soon be living in this area.

As an aside, the nearest existing stops to the high-density area are located along Madonna Road within a reasonable 5-minute walk distance. While the westbound stop (just west of Dalido Drive has a shelter, the eastbound stop (just east of Oceanaire Drive does not. As this will be the stop used by Cal Poly students while waiting for a bus to campus, a shelter at this stop would be beneficial.

Avila Ranch
Avila Ranch is a mixed-use residential/neighborhood commercial development under development along the north side of Buckley Road in southern San Luis Obispo. At buildout, it will include a total of 720 units, consisting of 125 higher-density units (24 units to the acre), 494 medium-density units (up to 20 units to the acre), and 101 lower-density units (7 units to the acre) as well as a small 15,000 square foot neighborhood commercial center.

The denser residential areas with the highest potential for transit ridership are in the northern portion of the site, along an extension of Eastwood Lane as well as along the east side of Horizon Lane in the northeast corner of the site. This development is at least a half-mile walk to the nearest existing SLO Transit stop (on South Higuera Street).

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 87
Service Alternatives
Alternatives are first presented that provide improved service to San Luis Ranch, as this project is farther along in the development process. Alternatives that also would serve Avila Ranch are presented next.

An important consideration in these alternatives beyond serving the new developments is addressing the existing poor service reliability of Routes 2A and 2B. LSC’s observations of on-time performance indicate that a majority (65 percent) of Route 2A runs are 6 or more minutes behind schedule, with 40 percent more than 15 minutes late. While Route 2B’s reliability is better, 49 percent of runs still operate at least 6 minutes land and 11 percent are more than 15 minutes late.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch – 90 Minute Frequency One option to serve San Luis Ranch would be to revise Routes 2A and 2B to better serve the development by traveling along Froom Ranch Way between Dalido Drive and Los Osos Valley Road, rather than Madonna Road, as shown in Figure 22. While Route 2 service to the stops near Madonna/Oceanaire would be eliminated, these stops would still be served by Route 3 (which currently generates 88 percent of the ridership at these stops). This would increase the Route 2A length by 0.8 miles while cutting 0.1 miles from Route 2B, respectively. To accommodate the additional running time as well as to solve the existing poor on-time performance, the route cycle time would be increased from 60 to 90 minutes. Operating the existing two buses would result in a 90-minute service frequency, which is typically considered a poor level of service for urban transit in mid-sized to larger urban areas.

As shown in Table 18, this option would not change the annual vehicle hours used for Route 2 service (two buses would be in operation throughout the existing span of service). The net decrease in mileage would reduce operating costs by $61,500 per year.

This alternative would have several impacts on ridership:
x Service to San Luis Ranch would be improved. However, since much of the high-density housing is already served by the stops along Madonna Street, this would be a relatively modest ridership benefit.
x The improvement in on-time reliability would increase ridership, as passengers (and potential passengers) have been proven to be very sensitive to poor service reliability. The document Valuing Transit Service Quality Improvements (Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2023) indicates that “Increased transit travel speeds can be valued based on average time costs, but reliability improvements should be valued at a higher rate, reflecting the high costs of unexpected delay. Each minute of delay beyond a “normal” two or three-minute delay should be valued at 3-5 times the standard in-vehicle travel time.” At present, Route 2A has about 10 minutes of excessive delay (on average) and Route 2B has about 5.5 minutes. This is perceived by the passenger as at least 30 minutes of travel time for Route 2A and 17 minutes for Route 2B.

Providing a much more reliable transit service would therefore have a substantial ridership benefit.
x Ridership would be reduced due to the reduction in frequency from 60 minutes to 90 minutes.

This can be found through elasticity analysis to have a moderate reduction in ridership.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 88
x The resulting service would no longer provide “clockface headways” whereby the bus serves any particular stop at the same time after each hour over the day. This has been found to be a substantial benefit to riders (and thus an increase in ridership) as it is easy to learn and remember service times. In addition, the current consistent transfer opportunities at the Transit Center would no longer be provided. Direct timed transfers would vary hour by hour, with an overall increase in the need to wait between buses. One strategy would be to schedule these runs to provide direction connections at the Transit Center to Route 4B in the AM hours and Route 4A in the PM hours, allowing trips to and from Cal Poly with minimal delays at the Transit Center. Overall, however, the changed schedule would have a moderate additional reduction in ridership.

In sum, this alternative is forecast to increase Route 2 ridership by 11,000 passenger boardings per year, with the benefits of increased reliability and additional service to San Luis Ranch outweighing the reductions from reduced frequency and consistency of schedule.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch – 45 Minute Frequency This option would be identical to the previous alternative, except that two additional buses would be used to provide service every 45 minutes. This would avoid the reduction in ridership associated with the change in headways and provide greater opportunity for connections at the Transit Center but at a substantial operating cost. As shown in Table 18, a ridership increase of 65,000 boardings per year over existing ridership would be generated, but the annual operating cost would be increased by $462,600 and two additional buses would need to be in operation.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Eliminate Descanso Street Loop – 60 Minute Frequency
Another option would be to revise Routes 2A and 2B to better serve San Luis Ranch but also eliminate the service along Los Osos Valley Road north of Froom Ranch Road to the turnabout loop using Prefumo Canyon Road, Del Rio Avenue, and Descanso Street. Eliminating service on this “Descanso Street Loop” would reduce the route length by 2.5 miles and reduce running time by approximately 7 minutes. This would solve roughly half of the existing on-time performance problem on Routes 2A and 2B if the routes are operated on the existing 60-minute cycle length. Annual operating costs would be reduced by $33,000.

All service would be eliminated to only two stops (along Del Rio Avenue at Profumo Canyon Road and at Descanso Street). Ridership at these stops is modest, totaling only roughly 7 passenger boardings per day. These passengers would need to walk at least an additional 850 feet to access the nearest stop on Los Osos Valley Road. The stops along Los Osos Valley Road would still be served by Route 3, though service frequency would be reduced from four times per hour to two times per hour. Approximately 10,200 annual boardings currently generated by Route 2A/2B in this area would be eliminated.

However, considering the ridership increase resulting from more reliable service throughout Routes 2A/2B and service to San Luis Ranch, the overall impact of this alternative would be a net increase of 18,000 passenger boardings per year.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 89

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 90
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch – 90 Minute Frequency By extending the Route 2 cycle length to 90 minutes, there would be more than adequate time to also extend the route to serve Avila Ranch, as shown in Figure 21. To reduce the number of stops that would need to be established, both Routes 2A and 2B would serve a clockwise loop around Suburban Road, Eastwood Lane, the extension of Ventura Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, and Buckley Road and before returning north on South Higuera Street. Route 2A would be 14 miles in length while Route 2B would be 12.8 miles in length. This option would operate the same number of vehicle-hours of service as today, but the net effect of the fewer runs and longer route would be a reduction in annual vehiclemiles of 14,300, yielding a reduction in annual operating cost of $31,900. The net impact on ridership generated by the reduction in frequency, improved reliability, and additional service area would be an increase of 21,000 boardings per year.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch – 45 Minute Frequency Adding two additional buses into Route 2A/2B service would provide service along an expanded route every 45 minutes. Ridership would be increased by a substantial 80,000 boardings per year. However, annual operating costs would be increased by $514,700 and an additional two buses would be needed in operation.

Establish New Avila Ranch Direct Route – 60-Minute Frequency Another option would be to establish a new route specifically to serve Avila Ranch. As shown in Figure 22, this route would use the existing Route 2 alignment south from downtown along South Higuera Table 18: SLO Transit - Additional Route Alternatives
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating Cost
Cash Fare
Revenues
Operating
Subsidy
Additional
Vehicles
Needed
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 90
Minute Headways 11,000 0 -27,600 -$61,500 $11,000 -$72,500 0 Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 45
Minute Headways 65,000 7,500 38,600 $462,600 $65,100 $397,500 2 Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch &
Cut Descanso Loop - 60 Minute Headways 18,000 0 -14,800 -$33,000 $18,000 -$51,000 0 Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and
Avila Ranch - 90 Minute Headways 21,000 0 -14,300 -$31,800 $21,000 -$52,800 0 Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and
Avila Ranch - 45 Minute Headways 80,000 7,500 62,000 $514,700 $80,200 $434,500 2 New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute
Headway 34,800 5,300 49,300 $375,900 $34,900 $341,000 1 New Broad - Avila Ranch - S. Higuera Loop Route -
- 60 Minute Headway 53,000 8,400 87,400 $616,400 $53,100 $563,300 2 Change in Annual Service(2)

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 91
Street and make a clockwise loop around Suburban Road, Eastwood Lane, the extension of Ventura Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, Buckley Road, and Vachelli Lane before returning north on South Higuera Street. This route is 8.8 miles in length and can be reliably served in an hour cycle length.

In addition to providing service to Avila Ranch, this option has the benefit of doubling service along the South Higuera Street corridor which has substantial ridership (roughly 2.5 times the ridership along the Broad Street corridor along Routes 1A/1B). This route also could serve the Elks Lane/Prado Road loop off of S. Higuera Street currently served by Route 2A, thereby reducing running time and improving the ontime performance of Route 2A. Note that serving this loop in the northbound direction would require a traffic signal at Elks Lane / S. Higuera Street to allow buses to reliably turn onto S. Higuera Street northbound.

This option has the benefit of only requiring a single additional bus to serve Avila Ranch without resulting in a 90-minute service frequency. Assuming service is provided over the same span as the existing Route 2A span, annual operating costs would be increased by $375,900, while ridership would be increased by 34,800 boardings per year.

Broad Street / Tank Farm Road / S. Higuera Loop Route to Serve Avila Ranch A final option would be to create a large bi-directional route using Broad Street between the Transit Center and Tank Farm Road, Tank Farm Road, Long Street, Cross Street, and Short Street to access the Avila Ranch area and South Higuera Street to the Transit Center. As shown in Figure 22, this route is 10.4 miles long, though the relatively high speeds along the long stretch of Tank Farm Road with no ridership potential would allow it to operate in a 60-minute cycle length.

It is assumed that one direction would be operated over the same span as Route 2A and the other over the same span as Route 2B, resulting in an annual operating cost of $616,400. Two additional buses would be required at peak times.

Ridership would be generated by providing half-hourly service along both the Broad Street and South Higuera Street corridors, by serving Avila Ranch, as well as by providing a new more convenient connection for transit travel between southwest and southeast San Luis Obispo. Overall, ridership is forecast to increase by 53,000 boardings per year.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 92

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 93
Service Alternatives Performance Analysis
Table 19 presents an evaluation of the performance of the additional service alternatives. This follows the methodology discussed in Technical Memorandum Four: Service Alternatives and applies the performance standards of a minimum of 11.5 passenger-trips per vehicle-hour and marginal operating costs that do not exceed $11.23 per passenger-trip. A review of these results indicates the following:
x All of these alternatives meet the cost-effectiveness standard with the exception of the Broad Street – Avila Ranch – South Higuera loop route.
x The three options that increase ridership while not adding vehicle-hours (90-minute service to San Luis Ranch, 60-minute service to San Luis Ranch and cutting the Descanso loop, and 90- minute service to San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch) perform particularly well as they reduce costs (by reducing vehicle-miles of service) while expanding ridership. These three options also help meet overall service productivity standards by increasing ridership without adding vehiclehours. x Of the options that serve Avila Ranch while avoiding 90-minute service frequency, the best performance is provided by the 45-minute service on an expanded Route 2A/2B. While the productivity figure of 10.7 passenger-trips per vehicle-hour does not achieve the standard of

11.5, it is close.
x A new direct route along South Higuera Street serving Avila Ranch would have slightly better performance than the large bi-directional loop using South Higuera Street, Tank Farm Road, and Broad Street, and would be substantially less expensive. However, this cannot be implemented until a new traffic signal is in place at Elks Road and S. Higuera.

Table 19: Additional Service Alternatives Performance Analysis Annual
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Annual Marginal
Operating Cost 1
Passenger-Trips
per Vehicle
Service Hour
Marginal Op.

Cost per
Passenger-Trip
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 90 Minute
Headways 11,000 0 -27,600 -$61,500 Note 2 -$5.59
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 45 Minute
Headways 65,000 7,500 38,600 $462,600 8.7 $7.12
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch & Cut
Descanso Loop - 60 Minute Headways 18,000 0 -14,800 -$33,000 Note 2 -$1.83 Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila
Ranch - 90 Minute Headways 21,000 0 -14,300 -$31,800 Note 2 -$1.51 Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila
Ranch - 45 Minute Headways 80,000 7,500 62,000 $514,700 10.7 $6.43 New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute Headway 34,800 5,300 49,300 $375,900 6.6 $10.80 New Broad - Avila Ranch - S. Higuera Loop Route -- 60
Minute Headway 53,000 8,400 87,400 $616,400 6.3 $11.63
Recommended
Performance
Standards

11.5 $11.23
Note 1: Does not include fixed costs
Note 2: As there is an increase in ridership with no change in vehicle-hours, this measure calculates as infinite.

Net Impact
Alternatives meeting performance standards shaded in green. Note that alternatives meet standards by increasing ridership at a greater rate than costs, eliminating a service not meeting standards, or increasing ridership while decreasing costs.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

San Luis Obispo Transit Page 94
Summary
Based on the performance analysis of all the service alternatives, the following service alternatives have the greatest potential to enhance the SLO Transit service and should be carried forward into the plan development process:
x Realigning Routes 1 and 3 in downtown San Luis Obispo. x Providing B route service on weekend days year-round. x Increasing Route 4A frequency on weekday mornings in the academic year. x Increasing Route 4B frequency on weekday afternoons in the academic year. x Reinstating pre-COVID routes: Route 6X, Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper.

While doubling service frequency would generate substantial ridership benefits, it would require significant new funding sources as well as consideration of capital fleet and facility needs. Doubling frequency on Routes 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B would have the lowest marginal operating cost per new passenger-trip served.

Although the Revising Route 2A/2B to service San Luis Ranch with 90-minute headways meets performance standards, reducing service frequency does not improve overall transit service nor does it meet city goals of increasing frequency. Adding a second bus in each direction to have 45-minute headways would have a large increase in ridership but also a large increase in costs. Revising Route 2A/2B to serve San Luis Ranch, cut the Descanso loop to maintain 60-minute headways with good ontime performance, has good ridership and cost-saving benefits. When Avila Ranch warrants transit service, the direct route on 60-minute headways performs the best.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 95
Chapter 8

SLO TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS

INTRODUCTION
This chapter focuses on the recommended capital improvements needed to operate transit services, specifically the transit fleet, the passenger amenities, and the Downtown Transit Center.

FLEET REPLACEMENT PLAN
Transit vehicles must be regularly replaced to maintain a safe and reliable fleet. The SLO Transit Asset Management Plan sets a target to allow no more than 50% of the revenue vehicle fixed route fleet to exceed the FTA-defined useful life. As the vehicle procurement process can take multiple years, transit agencies must identify their vehicle needs well in advance. Additionally, the State of California’s (CA) Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) regulation will begin impacting transit vehicle procurement in 2026, at which point 25 percent of small transit agency fleet bus purchases will be required to be ZEBs. By 2029, this purchasing requirement will increase to 100 percent. By 2040, all vehicles in the fleet will need to be ZEBs. To meet these standards, transit agencies can purchase either battery-electric buses (BEBs) or fuel-cell electric buses (FCEBs).

Currently, ZEBs are considerably more expensive than gasoline or diesel vehicles, meaning SLO Transit will need to secure additional funding to meet local match requirements for capital grants. While ZEBs are more expensive at this point, the market is constantly changing as new models are released and older models are improved, making it hard to predict future pricing. The seven-year SLO Transit vehicle replacement schedule presented in this report is subject to change as new ZEB technologies become available, and costs stabilize.

SLO Transit is actively replacing buses and has now committed fully to purchasing only BEBs. There is an order of six BEB buses expected to be in service in the Fall of 2025 and an order of two BEB’s that are expected to be in service in 2026.

Table 20 presents SLO Transit’s anticipated vehicle needs, and purchasing/refurbishment schedule based on the agency’s current fleet, SLO Transit’s Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan (2024), and the Useful Life Benchmark (ULB) of the different vehicle models, as identified by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Table 20 lists the number of buses currently on order but does not include the costs in the sevenyear bus replacement/refurbishment schedule. Only buses that have not yet been ordered and funded are included in the costs. Table 20 does not include any expansion vehicle purchases required to support the recommended service plan presented in this SRTP.

SLO Transit has 19 fixed-route vehicles that range in age from 2 to 17 years old. SLO Transit has one replica trolley that is used seasonally and a double-decker bus which is less frequently used. SLO Transit purchased two BEB’s in 2022. These buses are now in service and will eventually replace two older model-year diesel buses or be used to expand the fleet for potential service expansion. For the current level of service, the base fleet size is 17, with 15 fixed-route buses. The total number of vehicles that will need to be replaced in the seven-year planning period will be 15. This does not include a potential

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 96
expanded fleet for added services. The 15 buses in the base fleet which need to be replaced or refurbished will completed as follows:
x 8 battery-electric Gillig buses currently on order
x 1 new battery-electric replica trolley
x 1 new battery-electric bus to replace the 2011 cutaway bus x 5 refurbished model year 2007 (2), 2012 (1), and 2013 (2) Gillig diesel buses x 1 refurbished interior on the model year 2009 double-decker bus This results in a net addition of one fixed-route bus. This will allow for the transition to battery electric buses while charging infrastructure is being developed. It is anticipated that some buses will need to charge during the day, requiring more buses to be available for service. Given current market costs and anticipated inflation, it is expected that vehicle replacement and refurbishment needs will cost SLO Transit a total of $13 million over seven years.

Bus Refurbishment
SLO Transit has programmed funds to overhaul five buses – two in 2026, two in 2027, and one in 2028.

This will extend the life of five fixed-route diesel buses that would otherwise need to be retired by 2025.

These buses would have their useful life extended by at least seven years to 2033 and 2034. The work being pursued by SLO Transit is a comprehensive refurbishment of the exterior, passenger compartment, driver’s area, wheelchair loading, and securement systems, electrical system, engine compartment, suspension, steering, brakes, heating/air-conditioning, radiator/cooling system, exhaust system, engine, and transmission. In addition, SLO Transit is considering overhauling the interior of the existing model year 2009 double-decker bus to have on hand for very high passenger load runs during the academic year.

This effort will position SLO Transit to manage the transition to battery electric buses and to have an expanded fleet for potential service additions. The budget for the full bus overhaul is $400,000 per bus.

The city has programmed $2.5 million to cover the cost of the five buses plus contingency. The cost for the interior overhaul of the double-decker bus is budgeted at $150,000.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Table 21 presents a seven-year capital improvement plan for all items outside of revenue fleet replacement. This includes bus yard improvements, technology, bus stop improvements, BEB charging infrastructure, and rehabilitation of the Downtown Transit Center.

This seven-year capital improvement program totals $6 million and will be funded primarily through the SB 125 program and Federal Transit Administration grants. The major components are discussed below.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 97
Table 20: SLO Vehicle Replacement/Refurbishment Schedule- By Year of Purchase Order Existing
Orders
Prior to FY
25/26
25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32
Bus Replacements
Fixed Route Buses 0
Battery Electric - 35' $1,253,700 Number of Buses (35' BEB) 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Battery Electric - 40' $1,279,139 Number of Buses (40' BEB) 6 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 Battery Electric Cutaway $355,000 Number of Buses (Cutaway BEB)3 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 Battery Electric Trolley $655,300 Number of Buses (Replica Trolley BEB) 0 0 0 1 0 0 00 1 Total Number of Vehicles 8 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
Total Cost 1 $9,483,376 $1,291,300 $0 $716,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,007,400 Bus Refurbishments
Fixed Route Buses
Diesel Buses $450,000 Number of Buses Refurbished 2 2 1 5 Diesel Double Decker $150,000 Number of Double Deck Refurbished 1 1 Total Number of Vehicles 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 6
Total Cost 1 $927,000 $1,113,900 $491,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,532,600 Total Vehicle Needs $9,483,376 $2,218,300 $1,113,900 $1,207,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,540,000 Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc, SLO Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan.

Note 3: No Altoona tested electric cutaways are available as of the time of writing (October 2024).Note 4: Presented schedule is based on the City of SLO Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan (March 2024) and the Federal Transit Administration's Useful Life Benchmark. Future vehicle purchases are subject to change. Additional vehicle purchases necessary to implement service elements included in this SRTP are not included in this table. The total costs do not include six-bus battery electric bus order authorized in July 2023, or the two-bus battery electric bus order in March 2024
Note 1: 35-foot and 40-foot bus costs are based on recently issued purchase orders. All costs assume 3.0 percent annual inflation 7-Year Plan
Total
(excluding
existing bus
orders prior to
FY 25/26)
Plan Period (by Fiscal Year) 2
Estimated Current Cost of VehiclesEstimated Current Cost of Vehicles Note 2: Starting in 2026, 25% of new vehicle purchases in 2026 must be ZEBs.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 98
Table 21: SLO Transit Capital Projects - By Year of Contract Award or Purchase Order Category Project 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32ZEB Charging Transit Facility EV Charging Infrastructure $ 699,300 $ 699,300 Passenger Amenities
Bus Shelter Replacements/Bus Stop Improvement $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 630,000 Capital Maintenance Parking Lot Maintenance - Bus Yard $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Technology City of SLO AVL System Replacement $ 430,000 $ 430,000 Transit Center
Downtown San Luis Obispo Transit Center Rehabilitation $ 140,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 3,140,000 Technology On-Board Bus Security Camera
System Replacement $ 750,000 $ 750,000
Technology Digital Displays at Key Bus Stops $51,500 $53,000 $54,500 $33,600 $34,500 $35,400 $36,600 $ 299,100 Non Revenue
Vehicles
Replacement of Road Supervisor Van with Battery Electric Van $ 150,000 $ 150,000 TOTAL $ 641,500 $ 1,183,000 $ 574,500 $ 1,623,600 $ 1,624,500 $ 125,400 $ 126,600 $ 6,598,400 Source: SLOCOG 2025 FTIP; City of SLO 2023-2025 Financial Plan; TIRCP Project List, 2023 7-Year Plan
Total
Plan Period (by Fiscal Year)

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 99
Charging Infrastructure
The City of SLO recently completed an expansion of charging infrastructure at the operations and maintenance facility. An additional expansion of charging infrastructure will be needed to transition to a BEB fleet. In addition to the two BEB currently in the SLO Transit fleet, six more are expected to go into service in the fall of 2025 and two more in 2026. This will be a total of ten BEBs in service by 2026.

The SLO Transit ZEB Rollout Plan notes that the buildout of the charging infrastructure at the bus yard will consist of 24 parking stalls with charging dispensers. The city is also working on a multi-site solar panel project which includes installation of panels at the bus yard to offset daytime charging needs. The project includes the installation of three solar arrays over the newly improved bus parking and maintenance area totaling 17,000 square feet of coverage. This will be completed by the Spring of 2026.

TRANSIT FACILITIES
The SLO Transit Operations and Maintenance Facility is a 2.5-acre site located at 29 Prado Road in San Luis Obispo, and houses all operations, maintenance, and dispatch functions. The facility is located adjacent to the City’s Water Department. The facility will eventually host twelve dual-port chargers for BEBs. The 2023 RTP recommended that a new, stand-alone maintenance facility be developed for SLO Transit in the next few years to provide increased vehicle storage capacity and improved amenities for staff.

Passenger Amenities
Bus Stops
SLO Transit serves 166 bus stops within San Luis Obispo and the nearby Cal Poly Campus. Of these stops, 50 have shelters and 111 have benches. Solar lights are installed at 23 stops and electronic, real-time schedule signs are installed at 3 stops. Almost all the SLO Transit bus stops have an information kiosk (96 percent). The two largest SLO Transit bus stops are the Downtown transit center and the Cal Poly Kennedy Library. Some SLO Transit stops are shared with the RTA.

During the On-Board Survey effort which took place October 23rd through October 27th, 2023, surveyors riding buses recorded boarding and alighting activity on SLO Transit fixed routes. Despite this survey taking place over multiple days its goal was to capture service equivalent to a full weekday service across all routes aside from the SLO transit Highland Tripper Route. This data is subject to human error but provides a useful approximation of boarding activity at individual stops and actual boarding numbers are likely to be greater than the recorded data.

Boardings at individual stops that were shared between multiple routes were added together to estimate daily boardings across routes for individual stops. Stops with over 10 estimated daily boardings were then cross-referenced with the SLO bus stop amenity inventory finalized January 2024 to identify stops with 10 or more boardings and no bench, or 25 or more boardings and no shelter. Identified stops were then explored in Google Maps Street View to verify the lack of those amenities. In some instances,

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 100
stops were removed due to the presence of amenities not included in the organizational databases highlighting the need to ensure these databases are accurate and up to date.

As shown in Table 22, there were 2 stops served by SLO routes that had 10 or more combined boardings and no bench. There were 7 stops served by SLO routes that had 25 or more combined boardings and no shelter. Space for improved bus stop amenities is lacking at some of these stops. A full listing of stops that meet the recommended threshold for benches and buses is provided in Table 22 below.

The current bus shelter pricing in the CalACT pricing cooperative (RFP #20-01) ranges from $8,286 for a 9-foot shelter to $12,356 for a 21-foot shelter. This is base pricing and does not include options such as trash receptacles and map cases. Installation costs will vary depending on site characteristics. The shelter contract also includes solar-powered, real-time information displays for $8,183 which includes a 5-year data plan.

The SLO Transit Innovation Study included a focus on the importance of bus stops for rider safety and comfort. Lighting and shelters at bus stops are identified as priorities. In addition to adding shelters to high-boarding locations, the city is also prioritizing the replacement of older passenger shelters.

Other improvements identified in the SLO Transit Innovation Study include the addition of bus bulb-outs in the downtown area. Bus bulb-outs are extensions of the curb allowing the bus to stop and board passengers in the travel lane. In this sense, the bulb-out is the opposite of a pull-out where the bus pulls out of the travel lane to the curb. With pull-outs, the bus needs to wait for traffic to clear to pull back into the travel lane. With a bulb-out, the bus is essentially stopping in the travel lane and can proceed without waiting for traffic to clear. In addition to the efficiency of boarding passengers, the bulb-out also provides additional space for shelters, signage, seating, and passenger waiting. There are no specific bus bulb-out projects included in this plan. The addition of bulb-outs needs to be weighed against blocking the travel lane and potentially creating traffic congestion. Bus bulb-out design needs to be integrated into the overall street, intersection, parking, and sidewalk design at the bulb-out location.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 101
Deterring Loitering at Bus Stops
Passenger amenities at bus stops are important to enhance a person’s experience while waiting for the bus. In addition to being safe, convenient, comfortable, and accessible for pedestrians waiting for the bus, bus stop amenities need to be designed with features to discourage long-term occupancy and sleeping. Features meant to deter this activity include vertical bars to segment benches into smaller seating areas, sloped benches, partial enclosure of the shelter, and perforated panels rather than solid panels. Passenger shelter lighting that is illuminated during all hours of darkness can also act as a deterrent and security measure.

Park-and-Ride Lots
The City of San Luis Obispo finished developing the Calle Joaquin Park-and-Ride lot in 2018, however, the facility is not currently served by SLO Transit or the RTA. The spot contains 31 parking spaces, two motorcycle spaces, and a bus turnout. There are no plans for additional park-and-ride improvements in the seven-year planning period.

Bicycle Amenities
SLO Transit has five bus stops with bicycle racks: the Downtown Transit Center, Marsh Street at Osos Street, Marsh Street at Chorro Street, the San Luis Obispo Amtrak Station, and Santa Rosa Street at Leff Street. The SLO Transit Innovation Study recommends increased bike parking at or near bus stops as a first-last mile connection to transit and as a measure to reduce single-occupancy automobile trips. Bike parking can take the form of bike racks or lockers. A recent example of bike lockers with the ability to Table 22: SLO Transit Stop Amenity Concerns
Route and Stop Stop ID Routes Served Shelter Bench
Combined
Boardings Across
Routes
Space for
Improved
Ammenities
Stops With 25 or More Daily Boardings and No Shelter
LOVR at Laguna Lane (Midd 0218 2A, 3B No Yes 47 Yes
Ramona at S. Tassajara 0327 3A, 4B, LT No Yes 41 No
Foothill at Patricia 0405 3A, 4A, 4B, LT No No 36 No
Foothill at La Entrada 0325 2A, 2B, 3A, LT No Yes 28 No Madonna Road at Madonna 0251 3A, 4B, LT No Yes 26 Yes
Foothill at Rosita 0334 4A No No 25 No
Stops with 10-24 Daily Boardings and No Bench
La Cuesta Inn 1 Trolly No No 22 Yes
Monterey at Toro 0404 4B, Trolley No No 22 Yes
Monterey at California 0406 4B, Trolley No No 20 No
Madonna Road at Madonna 0208 2B,3A No No 15 No
Monterey/Osos 3 Trolley No No 13 Yes
Foothill at Cuesta 0332 3B,4A,LT No No 12 No
Grand at Monterey 0410 4B No No 12 No
LOVR at Laguna Lane (Midd 0226 2A,2B,3B No No 10 Yes
Source: LSC Boarding and Alighting Counts, SLO Transit Stop Amenities Database, Google Maps

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 102
rent by the hour are the Bike Link lockers on Morro Street north of Pacific Street where 6 lockers have been added. These lockers are close to multiple bus stops in the downtown area.

Downtown Transit Center
The 2016 SRTP noted that a significant constraint to the regional San Luis Obispo public transit network is the existing transit hub in downtown San Luis Obispo (Government Center). This currently consists of a SLO Transit facility on the west side of Osos Street between Mill Street and Palm Street, and an RTA facility on the east side of Osos Street between Monterey Street and Palm Street. The SLO Transit facility provides sawtooth bays for up to five buses along with shelter structures. The RTA facility provides approximately 200 feet of straight curb, which is adequate to accommodate up to three buses, depending on the order which individual buses arrive. There is also a drop-off-only area around the corner on Palm Street that accommodates a fourth bus. In 2020 RTA added new bus shelters, an expanded passenger waiting area, a bicycle repair station and new LED bus arrival signs, and a ticket vending machine. However, the following deficiencies remain:
x There is inadequate space for all RTA buses at peak times, resulting in buses that park around the corner on Palm (potentially conflicting with other uses), or that end up parked at an angle to the curb. This can block travel lanes on Osos Street, and increase hazards to passengers boarding/alighting the bus and preclude deployment of the wheelchair lift/ramp. x The number of bays available for SLO Transit limits the ability to schedule services to maximize direct bus-to-bus transfers.
x While there are restrooms available at nearby public buildings (City Hall, Library), these are only available during operating hours.
x Transferring between the SLO Transit and RTA systems requires walking across two streets. x Both blocks are on a grade that exceeds the desired maximum slope of a facility as defined by the ADA (2 percent). This creates challenges for wheelchair users transferring between buses and can also increase hazards associated with using a lift or ramp. x Bus shelter capacity is inadequate at peak times, particularly for RTA passengers. The south-facing passenger shelters also cause passenger discomfort during afternoon periods due to inadequate shade.
x There is inadequate street lighting for night-time operations, as well as to address personal security concerns.
x The 8-foot-wide sidewalks adjacent to the RTA bus locations get congested, particularly when a wheelchair lift, or ramp is in use.

The SLO Transit Innovation Study includes the concept of Mobility Hubs, which bring together public transit, bikeshare, carshare, scooter share, and other first-last mile solutions without the use of a private vehicle. The study notes that a location of interest for a future Mobility Hub is the Downtown Transit Center.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 103

OTHER PLANNED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Replace CAD/AVL and Automatic Passenger Counters
SLO Transit uses computer-aided dispatch/automatic vehicle location (CAD/AVL) provided by a thirdparty vendor that integrates on-board technology and a real-time passenger information system. The automatic passenger counting (APC) system, which is installed on the 19 SLO Transit vehicles. is part of the CAD/AVL system. The SLO Transit Innovation Study places a high priority on replacing the CAD/AVL and APC systems to incorporate more state-of-the-art technology. The capital improvement program includes funding in FY 2027/28 to replace the system on all SLO Transit fixed-route buses. There may be an opportunity to procure systems jointly with RTA, which has a CAD/AVL technology contract that expires in May 2026.

Enhance Real-time Passenger Information
A real-time passenger information system provides bus arrival times and bus locations to the public on a website, smart-phone application, real-time digital display signs at bus stops, and the on-board stop annunciators. This is commonly integrated into the CAD/AVL software package. As noted above, the SLO Transit Innovation Study sets a high priority for the replacement of the CAD/AVL system for SLO transit.

An important reason for this is for SLO Transit’s passengers to be able to fully rely on a reliable state-ofthe-art real-time information system to assist with daily travel planning on SLO Transit.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 104
This page intentionally left blank.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 105
Chapter 9

SLO TRANSIT FINANCIAL CONDITIONS

INTRODUCTION
This chapter focuses on existing financial conditions (including fare considerations) and presents “base case” financial forecasts. This information is used as the basis for specific financial plans to support system enhancements.

PROJECTED OPERATING EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES
Table 23 presents the projected FY 2025-26 operating costs which were used to analyze service alternatives in Working Paper 4. The total operating budget is projected to be $5.7 million with $2.6 million of this amount representing fixed costs (costs that do not increase if service levels increase).

Purchased transportation costs (per hour costs) amount to $1.9 million and mileage-related costs such as fuel and maintenance total to around $1 million.

Table 24 presents projected operating expenses for the seven-year planning period. An inflation escalator of three percent was applied to FY 2025-26 costs. Also presented in Table 24 is the projected operating revenue for SLO Transit. These figures are based on the City of San Luis Obispo FY 2024-25 Supplemental Budget, historical growth, and SLOCOG projections. As presented, there is sufficient operating revenue available throughout the planning period, if public transit services were to continue as is (status quo). In fact, during the early years of the planning period, there is a surplus of around $600,000 potentially available to implement some of the service alternatives discussed in Working Paper 4 or alternatively to fund capital projects.

CAPITAL REVENUES
Recurring capital revenues are presented at the bottom of Table 24. These figures are based on the City of San Luis Obispo FY 2024-25 budget and SLOCOG forecasts. Recurring revenue sources such as FTA 5307 funds are projected to amount to around $3.7 million annually.

SLO Transit capital expenditures are discussed in greater detail in Working Paper 7. Total capital plan expenditures from Working Paper 7 are compared to projected capital revenues in Table 24. As shown, sufficient funding is available for vehicle replacement and charging infrastructure projects, particularly in the latter years of the planning period when fewer capital projects are planned.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 106
Table 23: SLO Transit Operating Costs
Expenditures and Obligations
Projected FY
2025-26
Vehicle
Service Hours
Vehicle
Service Miles Fixed
Staffing $345,108 $345,108
Other Contract Services $169,680 $169,680
Purchased Transportation $3,856,773 $1,980,814 $222,045 $1,653,914 Fuel $365,000 $365,000
Maintenance $355,775 $355,775
Other Operating Expenditures $144,931 $144,931
CalPERS ADP $12,555 $12,555
Transfers Out $474,427 $474,427
RTA, SLOCOG, and other Off-the-top
contributions from the TDA $0
Total Operating Costs $5,724,249 $1,980,814 $1,087,751 $2,655,684 Annual Service Quantity 38,000 398,400
Cost per Unit by Variable (Cost Model) $52.13 $2.73 $2,655,684 Source: City of SLO 2023-25 Financial Plan Supplement
Cost Variable

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 107
Table 24: SLO Transit Revenues vs Expenditures
FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32 Operating Revenues
Passenger fare revenue(1) $260,000 $265,200 $275,900 $292,800 $316,900 $349,900 $394,000 Cal Poly Transit Agreement (2) $750,000 $750,000 $772,500 $772,500 $772,500 $795,675 $795,675 Interest $32,815 $22,648 $43,017 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000Transportation Development Act (TDA) - Local Transportation Fund (LTF) (3) $2,000,000 $2,024,000 $2,048,300 $2,072,900 $2,097,800 $2,123,000 $2,148,500 Transportation Development Act (TDA) - State Transit Assistance (STA) (3) $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 Other State Grants $8,722 $8,722 $8,722 $8,700 $8,700 $8,700 $8,700FTA 5307 Preventative Maintenance(3) $210,765 $214,980 $219,280 $223,700 $228,200 $232,800 $237,500FTA 5307 Operating(3) $2,357,125 $2,440,400 $2,512,250 $2,594,900 $2,676,700 $2,745,263 $2,822,763 Total Operating Revenue $6,344,427 $6,450,950 $6,604,969 $6,733,500 $6,868,800 $7,023,338 $7,175,138 Available Operating Balance $0 $620,178 $1,175,128 $1,707,197 $2,185,597 $2,611,597 $2,998,834 Status Quo Operating Expenditures $5,724,249 $5,896,000 $6,072,900 $6,255,100 $6,442,800 $6,636,100 $6,835,200 Balance $620,178 $1,175,128 $1,707,197 $2,185,597 $2,611,597 $2,998,834 $3,338,772 Capital Revenues
FTA 5307 (Capital)(3) $2,984,435 $4,503,627 $4,109,525 $4,091,994 $4,054,653 $4,005,601 $3,928,101 State of Good Repair(2) $0 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 Capital Fund Balance -- $124,635 $2,334,361 $4,664,586 $7,135,979 $9,569,133 $13,452,333 Total Capital Recurring Revenue $2,984,435 $4,631,261 $6,446,886 $8,759,579 $11,193,633 $13,577,733 $17,383,434 Capital Plan Expenditures Status Quo $2,859,800 $2,296,900 $1,782,300 $1,623,600 $1,624,500 $125,400 $126,600 Capital Balance with no Discretionary Funding $124,635 $2,334,361 $4,664,586 $7,135,979 $9,569,133 $13,452,333 $17,256,834 Source: FY 2024-25 Supplemental BudgetNote 1: Passenger fares escalated at the SLOCOG projected city population growth rate of 1% annually.Note 2: Based on City BudgetNote 3: Assumes FTA 5307 is used to pay for half of total operating expenses minus fare revenues. Total FTA 5307 projected at SLOCOG annual growth rate.Note 4: If microtransit pilot is successful and City decides to operate their own vehicles for the service.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 108

OTHER FUNDING SOURCES
In recent years, funding sources such as grants, tax credits, and incentives have become available to assist local jurisdictions with transitioning to a Zero-Emission fleet. These sources would add to the capital revenue estimates above. One example is the Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP). Administered by CARB, this program aims to accelerate the adoption of cleaner, more efficient trucks and buses by providing fleets based in California with vouchers when they purchase zero-emission buses. The amount of the voucher depends on vehicle weight class, type of use, and whether or not it is in a disadvantaged community. For a large transit vehicle purchase, a transit agency could receive around a $150,000 voucher.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 109
Chapter 10

FARE ALTERNATIVES
SLO Transit Fare Structure Overview
One Way Fares
SLO Transit offers one-way general public fares of $1.50 for the general public and $0.75 for seniors and persons with disabilities. The City recently launched a pilot program to extend 50 percent discount fares to K-12 students. Children under 5 (up to two children per fare-paying adult) also ride for no charge.

Through the regional VIP pass, passengers eighty years and older can ride all fixed-route bus systems for free in the County.

Multi-Ride Passes
One-day passes are available for local in-network routes for $3.25, or 2.2 times the one-way trip fare.

The Regional Day Pass and 31-Day Pass options discussed in the RTA section include SLO Transit. SLO Transit also sells 3, 5, and 7-day passes for local routes at $7.00, $12.00, and $15.00, respectively. No discount rate is available for those passes. Additionally, the organization sells 16 ride passes for the price of $24.00 offering a savings of $6.00 compared to paying individual one-way fares. A 15-ride pass is available to seniors, persons with disabilities, and K-12 students at a 50% discount. Thirty-one day passes are also available for local routes only, at the price of $40.00 for the general public, $25.00 for K12 students with ID, $11.25 for 15-ride for seniors, persons with disabilities, and K-12, and $20.00 for seniors (ages 65 – 79), persons with disabilities, and Medicare cardholders with ID.

SLO Transit Peer Fare Review
As part of the San Luis Obispo Joint Short Range Transit Plan peer analysis, a fare comparison is included to gauge the SLO Transit fare levels relative to other similar transit agencies. The same peer systems (as used in the general peer analysis) were used to analyze the fares within SLO Transit.

SLO Transit Analysis
On SLO Transit, regular one-way fares are $1.50 and discounted fares are $0.75. As shown in Table 25, the average regular one-way fare among the SLO Transit peer systems is $1.44 (slightly below SLO Transit) and the average peer discounted fare is $0.75. For both SLO Transit and the peer average, the discounted fare is 50% lower than the original fare. Terre Haute Transit Utility (THTU), Billings Metropolitan Transit, and the City of Bowling Green are the three transit agencies with higher fares than SLO Transit.

Information on the pass options for SLO Transit and the peer systems is also presented in Table 25. All of the transit systems reviewed offer a day pass with the exception of THTU. The peer average price for a day pass is $3.25, which matches SLO Transit’s day pass price.

The majority of systems include multi-ride punch passes in their fare structure. All of the peer systems provide multiple-day passes, including 10-day, 35-day, monthly, and semester passes. The peer monthly

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 110
(including 30-35 day) passes range from $25.00 - $45.00, averaging at $35.75. SLO Transit’s local monthly pass cost of $40.00 exceeds the peer average.

FARE STRATEGIES
Comparison of RTA and SLO Transit Fares
RTA regional routes, Paso Robles local routes, South County Transit local routes, and SLO Transit’s combined services create a cohesive transit network within San Luis Obispo County. While routes are well-connected across providers with ample transfer opportunities, the fare structures differ a bit. A summary of each provider's fare structure is illustrated in Table 25.

The base fare is $1.50 for all services with the exception of RTA’s regional routes ($1.75 to $3.25).

Another notable difference is the fact that RTA and Paso Robles routes do not have day pass options specific to those services, whereas South County and SLO Transit do. Simplifying and unifying fare structures across this largely cohesive transportation network would allow riders to easily make multiride pass purchase decisions and reduce the workload on administrative staff.

Table 25: SLO Transit Fare Structure Peer Analysis
Regular
Fare
Discount
Fare
%
Discount
Day
Pass
Punch
Pass
Multiday
Pass
Day Pass
Fare (Reg)
Monthly Pass
Fare (Reg)
City of Pocatello - Pocatello
Regional Transit (PRT) $1.00 $0.50 50% Y 40-ride monthly $2.00 $25.00 Pueblo Transit System (PT) $1.25 $0.60 52% Y 22-ride 35-day $3.75 $44.00 10-day
30-day
Terre Haute Transit Utility
(THTU) $1.75 $0.85 51% N 14-ride 31-day -- $45.00
semester
monthly
Billings Metropolitan Transit
(Billings MET Transit) $2.00 $1.00 50% Y 10-ride monthly $4.00 $28.00 4-ride
9-ride
Bloomington-Normal Public
Transit System $1.25 Free 100% Y -- monthly $3.00 $40.00 Average Peer Fare $1.44 $0.72 50% -- -- -- $3.25 $35.75 SLO Transit $1.50 $0.75 50% Y 15 ride
16-ride
3-day
5-day
7-day
31-day
$3.25 -
$5.50 $40.00
Source: Websites of respective transit agencies
$40.00
$2.50 $30.00
The City of Bowling Green
(GOBG) $2.00 $1.00 50% Y monthly $5.00
$2.50 $34.00
City of St. George (SunTran) $1.00 $0.50 50% Y 10-ride
One-Way Fares Fare Media Types Offered Pass Costs
Northern Arizona
Intergovernmental Public
Transit Authority (NAIPTA)
$1.25 $0.60 52% Y --

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 111
Expand Downtown Access Program (DAP) for SLO Transit
The City of San Luis Obispo currently provides free passes on SLO Transit for all persons employed in the downtown area who request a pass and fill out an application form which can be auto-renewed annually. This program was implemented in response to paid parking downtown. The qualifying area of employment locations is shown in Figure 24 and is loosely defined by Peach Street on the north, Toro Street on the east, Pismo Street on the south, and Carmel Street on the west. The SLO Transit Innovation Study (Arcadis IBI Group, 2023) identified several areas for potential expansion of the downtown access pass area. Two such areas were evaluated as part of this SRTP study, as also shown in Figure 24:
x An eastern extension from the downtown area to encompass all areas south of US 101, west of San Luis Obispo Creek and north of Pismo Street.
x A southern extension from the downtown area to encompass all the area south of Pismo Street, west of the Union Pacific Railroad, and north of High Street. This includes the Railroad District.

The existing DAP program participants account for a total of 4,624 annual boardings. Based on the impacts of free-fare programs in other communities, it is estimated that 40 percent of these boardings are due to the free pass program while 60 percent would have ridden anyway. The existing DAP program therefore generates approximately 1,850 boardings per year that would not otherwise have occurred. US Census data for 2021 defined through a Work Area Profile Analysis using the “onthemap” online tool (onthemap.ces.census.gov) indicates that the existing DAP area includes 5,245 employees while the eastern area has 1,528 employees and the southern area has 855 employees. Assuming these additional employees make use of the free pass program at the same rate as those in the existing DAP area, expansion in the eastern area would add approximately 500 new passenger-trips per year, while the southern area would add 300 riders per year (or a total of 800 for both). The additional passes would cost on the order of $1,700 for the eastern area and $1,100 for the southern area, or a total of $2,600 for both.

The existing DAP passes are funded through the Parking Enterprise Fund up to $20,000 annually. New funding sources would be needed beyond that amount to offset the cost of additional passes for employees in the additional areas, or existing funding (such as general funds) could be used.

Simplify Day Pass Options
Multi-day passes which provide a discounted price to the cost of buying one-trips rides are a good incentive to encourage ridership. As indicated above, SLO Transit offers 1, 3, 5, 7, and 31-day passes.

Having too many fare options can be confusing to passengers as well as complicate the accounting process. A review of passes sold in Fiscal Year 2022-23 indicates that less than one percent of boardings are made with a five-day to seven-day pass. Eliminating these options simplifies the fare structure and makes riding public transit a little less complicated.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 112

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 113

NEW FARE TECHNOLOGY
Cal-ITP Open-Loop Contactless Fare Payment System
Recent years have seen a surge in the use of contactless payment technologies, including transit fares.

Studies have found that accepting contactless payments has lowered expenses for transit agencies and increased ridership. Both RTA and SLO Transit currently use the Token Transit App for fare payment. This app-based technology removes the need for passengers to go to specified locations to purchase tickets.

Tickets are validated electronically, allowing the transit agencies to collect important data on ridership and boardings while also taking pressure off the already busy drivers. For passengers, the Token Transit app is free. Transit agencies must purchase on-bus validators and pay approximately annual software fees (the RTA pays approximately $18,000 per year), and transit agencies enter into an agreement with Token Transit allowing Token Transit to retain a certain percentage of fares purchased through the app up to a set limit. There is also a per transaction fee which is paid by the transit agency.

The California Integrated Travel Project (Cal-ITP) is helping transit agencies to procure contactless payment technology. This technology can accept both agency-specific passes and contactless bank card payments and digital wallets. The benefits of contactless fare payment are improved ridership through ease of use (no need to look for $1.50) and faster boarding. This strategy can help with fare “fairness” and equity objectives when contactless fare payment is paired with fare capping. Transit fare capping is a fare payment model that sets a maximum amount a rider pays for fares over a specific period, such as a day, week, or month. Once this cap is reached, the rider doesn’t pay for additional trips taken during that period. The rider is also charged as you go, eliminating the need to pay for the full cost of a monthly pass in advance. One final advantage for RTA and SLO Transit is that, over the long term, the transit operators could curtail or even discontinue the use of the Genfare registering fareboxes. Some transit agencies that have implemented the Cal-ITP program have set a goal of a fully cashless fare system, including Monterey-Salinas Transit (2027). This would reduce the staff time needed for the fare counting process as well as the increasing cost of maintenance for the complicated and occasionally unreliable Genfare validating fareboxes.

In order to maintain a fare payment option for unbanked passengers, transit agencies could offer a reloadable card, which could be obtained at the transit agency office or specific outlets. Transit agencies could also continue to accept cash using a manual farebox, allowing the more costly Genfare fareboxes to be phased out.

Cal-ITP and the California Department of General Services have collaborated to establish six Master Service Agreements that allow public transit providers to purchase contactless payment hardware and software directly from vendors rather than through competitive bidding. These Master Service Agreements can be utilized by transit providers in California. The Cal-ITP program has also negotiated lower credit card processing fees, which comprise an ever-growing proportion of transit agency operating costs as more and more riders use credit cards to pay for their rides. SLOCOG has taken the lead in procuring and implementing a regionwide contactless fare payment system using SB 125 funds. It is estimated this project will cost on the order of $2.6 million over five years and includes “buy-down” of fare levels to encourage restoration of pre-pandemic ridership.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 114
A nearby adopter of open-loop contactless fare payment with fare capping (procured through Cal-ITP) is Monterey Salinas Transit (MST). General public passengers can ride anywhere on the MST system for $2 for 2 hours. Beyond the 2-hour mark, there is a $6.00 cap for the day, a weekly cap of $20.00, and a monthly cap of $70.00. The $2 for 2 hours eliminates the need to both tap on and tap off for a two-hour period in order to be charged the correct fare. Once a passenger taps on a bus, they will only be charged $2 until they tap on after that two-hour period. The quantitative impacts of applying a $2 for 2-hour fare structure to RTA routes is discussed above and presented in Table 24.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 115
Chapter 11

SHORT-RANGE TRANSIT PLAN
The Transit Innovation Study restates the City of SLO Climate Action Plan objective of a 7 percent transit mode split (the proportion of all trips made by transit) by 2030 and a 12 percent transit mode split by 2035. In 2016, the transit mode split in San Luis Obispo was calculated at 7 percent. At this time systemwide SLO Transit Ridership was around 1.2 million. In FY 2022-23, systemwide ridership was 515,000 or 57 percent lower. Since 2016, owning an automobile has become cheaper and COVID has changed travel patterns with more opportunities to work or learn from home. The service plan elements recommended in this short-range transit plan will increase ridership by 33 percent over base case scenario, bringing the city closer to the transit mode split objectives. The implementation of all plan elements will increase SLO Transit’s operating budget by 35 percent or $2.4 million by the end of the planning period. Given the City’s goals, this short-range transit plan assumes the availability of additional revenue sources beyond amounts recuring historically for operating purposes.

PLAN ASSUMPTIONS
x Forecasts of annual operating and administrative costs were developed as presented in Table 26, “Base case” or “status quo” operating and administrative cost forecasts were estimated based on the City of SLO 2023-25 Financial Plan Supplement. An annual inflation escalator of three percent was applied to FY 2025-26 costs to project operating costs for each year of the planning period.
x Ridership and corresponding fare revenue for each SRTP element was estimated as presented in Table 27. The “base case” ridership represents service levels as of the summer of 2024.

Ridership is assumed to grow at a rate of 2 percent annually. This reflects both the projected population growth rate of 1 percent annually, increase in college enrollment and a continued post-covid increase in ridership.

SERVICE PLAN
Ridership, operating costs and fare revenue estimates for SLO Transit service plan elements for SLO Transit are shown in Tables 26 and 27 and described below. The reader is encouraged to review the Alternatives Chapter for more detailed information on how each plan element was developed. Figure 25 presents all plan elements graphically.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 116
Table 26: SLO Transit Short Range Transit Development Plan Operating Costs Plan Element FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 2029-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32Base Case Operating Cost 1 Marginal Operating Costs $3,068,565 $3,160,600 $3,255,400 $3,353,100 $3,453,700 $3,557,300 $3,664,000 Fixed Costs $2,655,684 $2,735,400 $2,817,500 $2,902,000 $2,989,100 $3,078,800 $3,171,200Total $5,724,249 $5,896,000 $6,072,900 $6,255,100 $6,442,800 $6,636,100 $6,835,200 Plan Costs
Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper)2 $45,100 $46,400 $47,800 $49,200 $50,700 $52,200 $53,800 Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the Academic Year $39,900 $41,100 $42,300 $43,600 $44,900 $46,300 $47,600Operate B Routes on Weekends Year Round - 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM $0 $424,200 $436,900 $450,000 $463,500 $477,400 $491,800Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 45 Minute Headways $496,300 $511,200 $526,600 $542,400 $558,600 $575,400 $592,700Provide Academic Service Levels YearRound $0 $195,900 $201,800 $207,900 $214,100 $220,500 $227,100New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute Headway $0 $0 $435,900 $449,000 $462,400 $476,300 $490,600Late Night Microtransit Pilot - 10 PM to Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year $0 $0 $171,000 $176,100 $181,400 $186,800 $192,400Total Service Plan Costs $581,300 $1,218,800 $1,862,300 $1,918,200 $1,975,600 $2,034,900 $2,096,000 Total Operating Cost $6,305,549 $7,114,800 $7,935,200 $8,173,300 $8,418,400 $8,671,000 $8,931,200 Note 2: Route 6X implemented in September 2024.Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.Note 1: Base Case (status quo) costs based upon FY 2024-25 City of SLO Supplemental Budget, excluding capital. Assumes 3% annual inflation rate for the planning period.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 117
Table 27: SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan Ridership and Fare Revenue (1/2) FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 2029-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32 Annual Ridership
Base Case 574,100 585,582 597,294 609,240 621,424 633,853 646,530Service Plan Elements Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper)2 15,900 16,200 16,500 16,900 17,200 17,600 17,900 Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the Academic Year 8,100 8,300 8,400 8,600 8,800 8,900 9,100Operate B Routes on Weekends Year Round - 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM 0 40,400 41,200 42,000 42,900 43,700 44,600Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 45 Minute Headways 65,000 66,300 67,600 69,000 70,400 71,800 73,200Provide Academic Service Levels Year-Round 0 16,600 17,000 17,300 17,600 18,000 18,400New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute Headway 0 0 36,200 36,900 37,700 38,400 39,200Late Night Microtransit Pilot - 10 PM to Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year 0 0 7,400 7,500 7,700 7,800 8,000 Subtotal Impact of Plan Service Elements 89,000 147,800 194,300 198,200 202,300 206,200 210,400Impact of Fare Strategies Expansion of Downtown Access Program 800 800 800 800 900 900 900Total Ridership 663,900 734,182 792,394 808,240 824,624 840,953 857,830

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 118
Table 27: SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan Ridership and Fare Revenue (2/2) FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 2029-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32 Fare Revenues (Passenger Revenues)
Base Case $260,000 $265,200 $275,900 $292,800 $316,900 $349,900 $394,000Service Plan Elements Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper)2 $6,298 $6,424 $6,553 $6,684 $6,817 $6,954 $7,093 Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the Academic Year $600 $600 $600 $600 $600 $700 $700
Operate B Routes on Weekends Year Round - 7:45 AM - 8:00 PM $0 $16,200 $16,500 $16,900 $17,200 $17,600 $17,900Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 45 Minute Headways $65,100 $66,400 $67,700 $69,100 $70,500 $71,900 $73,300Provide Academic Service Levels Year-Round $0 $6,600 $6,800 $6,900 $7,000 $7,200 $7,300New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute Headway $0 $0 $36,300 $37,000 $37,800 $38,500 $39,300Late Night Microtransit Pilot - 10 PM to Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year $0 $0 $11,500 $11,800 $12,000 $12,300 $12,500 Subtotal Impact of Plan Service Elements $71,998 $96,224 $145,953 $148,984 $151,917 $155,154 $158,093Impact of Fare Modifications Total Fare Revenue $331,998 $361,424 $421,853 $441,784 $468,817 $505,054 $552,093 Source: LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 119

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 120
Reinstate Pre-COVID Routes (6X, Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper) The first step to increasing ridership and improving service for SLO City residents and students is to reinstate routes suspended during the pandemic. Route 6X was recently reintroduced. It is also recommended that the Highland Tripper and SLO Tripper are reinstated in FY 2025-26. These services provide additional runs during peak periods for SLO High School and Cal Poly students. It is estimated that reinstating these pre-COVID Routes (including Route 6X) will increase ridership by around 15,900 annually (FY 2025-26) for an increase in operating costs over base case of $45,100 annually (FY 2025-26).

This service plan element meets both productivity and cost-effectiveness performance standards. Two additional vehicles will be required for maximum service with the implementation of this alternative.

Increase Route 4A/4B Frequency During the Academic Year The Transit Innovation Study identified increasing frequency on fixed routes as a high priority. Route 4 is the most popular SLO Transit service, particularly with Cal Poly students. Route 4A is projected to provide upwards of 152,000 passenger-trips in FY 2025-26, and Route 4B is projected to provide 70,000 passenger-trips. Increasing service frequency during peak travel periods on Route 4 would likely further benefit ridership and improve connectivity between downtown and Cal Poly.

As part of this service plan element, SLO Transit should increase service frequency on weekdays during the academic year by adding two new runs on Route 4A departing the Government Center at 8:30 AM and 9:15 AM. In the afternoons, two additional runs on Route 4B, which operates in the counterclockwise direction, should be implemented which depart the Government Center at 4:15 PM and 5:00 PM. The alternatives performance analysis showed that this plan element will cost around $5.00 per additional trip served and will improve overall productivity in terms of passenger-trips per vehicle hour.

Increasing the frequency of Route 4A/4B is anticipated to increase ridership by 8,100 passenger-trips over base case while increasing operating costs by $39,900 annually. Implementation is recommended for the next fiscal year (FY 2025-26). One additional vehicle will be required for maximum service.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch – 45 Minute Headways At full buildout, the San Luis Ranch development along Madonna Road will include a total of 604 dwelling units. This includes 299 high-density housing units, 34 affordable housing units, and 83 medium-density units, all of which have a higher potential to generate transit ridership. The higherdensity residential development is concentrated along Madonna Road and is already served by SLO Transit. Under an agreement with Cal Poly, up to 300 students will soon be living in this area. The nearest existing stops to the high-density area are located along Madonna Road within a reasonable 5- minute walk distance.

To better serve the San Luis Ranch development, SLO Transit should revise Routes 2A and 2B by traveling along Froom Ranch Way between Dalido Drive and Los Osos Valley Road, rather than Madonna Road, as shown in Figure 22 and 25. While Route 2 service to the stops near Madonna/Oceanaire would be eliminated, these stops would still be served by Route 3 (which currently generates 88 percent of the ridership at these stops). This would increase the length of Route 2A by 0.8 miles while cutting 0.1 miles

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 121
from Route 2B, respectively. Route 2 also has a significant on-time performance issue with 40 percent of Route 2A runs operating more than 15 minutes late and 11 percent of Route 2B runs operating more than 15 minutes late (during a survey conducted in October 2023). To address the on-time performance issue and the longer route mileage, the revised Route 2A and 2B should operate on a 90-minute cycle length (time for one bus to make a round-trip) instead of 60 minutes. In order to maintain semi-frequent headways reasonable for an urbanized area, a second bus should be added to both 2A and 2B so as to provide 45-minute headways.

An additional 66,300 one-way passenger-trips are estimated with the implementation of this plan element in FY2025-26. Operating costs will increase by approximately $500,000 annually. Two more vehicles will be required.

Other factors to consider with this plan element include capacity at the Downtown Transit Center and transfers between SLO Transit Routes. With the increase in frequency of Route 2 from hourly headways to 45-minute headways, capacity at the Downtown Transit Center will be exceeded at certain times (assuming the schedules are maintained which maximize timed transfers between routes). Appendix G includes a series of tables showing when SLO Transit and RTA buses overlap at the Downtown Transit Center. Over the short-term, buses could overflow onto Palm Street until funding for a larger transit center can be secured.

According to on-board surveys, common transfer patterns for Route 2 passengers include:
x Route 2A to Route 1A
x Route 2A to Route 4A
x Between Route 2A and Route 2B
x Route 3A to Route 2A
These transfer patterns should be taken into consideration when finalizing schedules.

Operate B Routes on Weekends Year-Round – 7:45 AM to 8:00 PM The four counterclockwise B routes do not operate on weekends. As a result, service is limited to the large one-way A routes. While the fact that some key corridors are served by more than one A route (such as DTC – Foothill Boulevard or DTC – Madonna Road) still provides some direct bi-directional service, other trips can require a long travel time around the majority of the one-way A loop. Operating all four B routes on Saturdays and Sundays (as well as holidays on which weekend service is provided) would incur an annual operating cost of $424,200 and increase ridership by 40,400. This cost estimate takes into account the additional costs associated with revising Route 2 to serve San Luis Ranch.

Provide Academic Year Service Levels Year-Round
Cal Poly administration has indicated plans to expand class offerings and associated student activity levels in the summer. Additionally, Cal Poly will be switching to a semester based academic calendar.

Currently, SLO Transit operates a higher level of service during the academic year when student ridership is greatest. Providing that higher level of service year-round not only addresses Cal Poly

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 122
schedule changes but provides the community as a whole with more frequent public transit service. This alternative met the cost-effectiveness performance standard in the alternatives analysis.

As shown in the Plan Tables, this plan element would increase ridership by 16,600 annually with an associated operating cost increase of $195,900. No additional fleet would be required. This option also has the benefit of providing more consistent year-round driver schedules, which has the potential to increase driver retention. This plan element is slated for implementation in FY 2026-27.

New Avila Ranch Direct Route – 60 Minute Headway
Avila Ranch is a mixed-use residential/neighborhood commercial development under development along the north side of Buckley Road in southern San Luis Obispo. At buildout, it will include a total of 720 units, consisting of 125 higher-density units (24 units to the acre), 494 medium-density units (up to 20 units to the acre), and 101 lower-density units (7 units to the acre) as well as a small 15,000 square foot neighborhood commercial center.

As development is constructed for Avila Ranch, a new route should be implemented specifically to serve the development. As shown in Figure 23 and 25, this route would use the existing Route 2 alignment south from downtown along South Higuera Street and make a clockwise loop around Suburban Road, Eastwood Lane, the extension of Ventura Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, Buckley Road, and Vachelli Lane before returning north on South Higuera Street.

In addition to providing service to Avila Ranch, this option has the benefit of doubling service along the South Higuera Street corridor which has substantial ridership (roughly 2.5 times the ridership along the Broad Street corridor along Routes 1A/1B). This route also could serve the Elks Lane/Prado Road loop off of S. Higuera Street currently served by Route 2A, thereby reducing running time and improving the ontime performance of Route 2A. Note that serving this loop in the northbound direction would require a traffic signal at Elks Lane / S. Higuera Street to allow buses to reliably turn onto S. Higuera Street northbound.

As this route is not a one-way loop, only one additional bus would be needed to serve Avila Ranch with hourly headways. Assuming service is provided over the same span as the existing Route 2A span, annual operating costs would be increased by $435,900, while ridership would be increased by 36,200.

This plan element should not be implemented until warranted by development of Avila Ranch.

Late Night Microtransit Pilot – 10 PM to Midnight, 7 days/week, Academic Year Microtransit was also identified in the Transit Innovation Study as a long-term priority for the City of San Luis Obispo. Through the use of microtransit technology and phone apps, it is possible for a passenger to request a ride “on-demand” within certain areas and certain times. The benefit of microtransit is that it is not limited to a set route with set stops, but rather passengers can be picked up at their curb and dropped off at the curb of their destination. This allows homes on the outlying edges of neighborhoods to be served more directly or for passengers to make cross-town trips without transferring. The disadvantage of microtransit is that if there is high demand for service, there could be a 30-minute or longer wait for a ride. Passengers who depend on public transit to travel to work or appointments at

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 123
specific times may find microtransit less convenient, as a ride may not be available at the time they need it.

Microtransit has been successful in areas that are not easily served by a fixed route, low productive fixed routes or during the evenings and weekends, when there is less demand. Generally, SLO Transit Routes are very productive and therefore, it is not cost effective to replace the fixed routes with on-demand microtransit. However, the option of microtransit in the evening, when demand is typically lower, is recommended for consideration in FY 2027-28. Later evening service was the top requested service improvement during the SLO Transit on-board survey effort.

SLO Transit services are not available past 11 PM and only Routes 3 and 4 operate this late during the academic year. The general geographic extent of a potential city-wide late night microtransit service area is displayed in Figure 17 and 25. As part of this plan element, microtransit would be available between 10 PM and midnight during the academic year using three vans. Around 7,400 additional passenger-trips could be expected for an annual operating cost of around $171,000 annually. It is reasonable to charge a higher fare for microtransit than fixed route services. A general public fare of $4.00 with corresponding discounts for qualifying passenger-trips is recommended.

Microtransit should initially be implemented as a one-to-two-year pilot program. Three vans will need to be procured, if the current contractor is used. Alternatively, some areas have had success in procuring a separate contractor who specializes in microtransit to operate as a “turnkey” service. Under this scenario, the City would not have to purchase new vehicles or the microtransit software, as it would be included in the total cost of the contract.

If microtransit proves to be a successful form of public transit in San Luis Obispo, the city could consider expanding service to an all-day city-wide microtransit service. A ballpark cost estimate for an expanded microtransit program would be on the order of $1.7 million annually if operated from 6 AM to 10 PM.

Ridership generated from other similar microtransit programs operated by California transit operators indicates a potential demand of 75,400 trips annually from an all-day city-wide microtransit program.

With this level of demand, up to five vehicles would be required to operate the service at peak times while maintaining a wait time of around 30 minutes.

The fare agreement with Cal Poly, would not apply to microtransit. Therefore, students would be encouraged to continue to use the more cost-efficient fixed route, as it is free to them. This leaves microtransit available for trips which are more difficult and lengthy via fixed routes. The danger of microtransit is that the curb-to-curb/on-demand aspect can make the service quite popular. If more vehicles are added to meet the increased demand, costs will begin to rise significantly.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Transit services require ongoing capital investment in facilities and vehicles. Capital investments in both vehicles and passenger facilities can attract additional riders while improving the quality of service and safety of existing riders. Of note, California’s Innovative Clean Transit regulation will go into effect during the plan period, requiring SLO Transit to transition to zero-emission buses (ZEBs).

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 124
Fleet Replacement
Transit vehicles must be regularly replaced to maintain a safe and reliable fleet. The SLO Transit Asset Management Plan sets a target to allow no more than 50% of the revenue vehicle fixed route fleet to exceed the FTA-defined useful life. As the vehicle procurement process can take multiple years, transit agencies must identify their vehicle needs well in advance. A detailed fleet replacement table is presented in Chapter 8. In summary, SLO Transit has ordered eight BEB vehicles in FY 2025-26 to replace old diesel vehicles. During this planning period, an additional two BEB vehicles will be ordered.

Additionally, SLO Transit plans to refurbish six diesel buses (including the double-decker). This is consistent with CARB rules and the ZEV Rollout Plan. This results in a net addition of one fixed-route bus.

This will allow for the transition to battery electric buses while charging infrastructure is being developed. It is anticipated that some buses will need to charge during the day, requiring more buses to be available for service. Fleet replace will cost on the order of $4.5 million during the seven-year planning period.

Fleet Additions
The plan elements described above will require six more fixed-route vehicles for maximum service.

Currently 11 vehicles are required for maximum service. The SLO Transit fleet consists of 17 vehicles presently, not including the trolley and double decker bus. SLO Transit has already purchased 8 new BEB vehicles which will arrive sometime next year. Instead of replacing older vehicles with the new BEB’s, five of the existing vehicles will be kept in the active fleet and refurbished during the planning period.

This will bring the fleet up to a total of 22 vehicles. In order to maintain an appropriate spare ratio of 25 percent for the fixed route fleet, SLO Transit should have 21 vehicles. Therefore, SLO Transit does not need to purchase new fixed route vehicles in order to implement service plan elements.

SLO Transit does not own vans which would be suitable for the microtransit pilot. If microtransit service is successful in San Luis Obispo, the City should purchase at least three new vans toward the end of the planning period. This is reflected in the financial plan table below.

Other Capital Improvements
Table 21 in Chapter 8 presents a seven-year capital improvement plan for all items outside of revenue fleet replacement. This includes bus yard improvements, technology, bus stop improvements, BEB charging infrastructure, and rehabilitation of the Downtown Transit Center.

This seven-year capital improvement program totals $6 million and will be funded primarily through the SB 125 program and Federal Transit Administration grants.

Long Term Plan for Relocated Transit Center
The SLO Transit Innovation Study includes the concept of Mobility Hubs, which brings together public transit, bikeshare, carshare, scooter share, and other first-last mile solutions without the use of a private vehicle. The study notes that a location of interest for a future Mobility Hub is the Downtown Transit Center.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 125
The 2016 SRTP noted that SLOCOG was leading an effort to construct a new enhanced transit center on Higuera Street between Santa Rosa Street and Toro Street. In 2012 the Coordinated Downtown San Luis Obispo Transit Center Study recommended a facility consisting of up to 16 bus bays, indoor/outdoor passenger waiting areas, driver break areas, restrooms and a transit information counter. The larger transit center would allow for more buses to be able to pulse in and out of the transit center which would enable enhanced route timing coordination. Currently SLO Transit has 5 bus bays. There are multiple times of day when five buses are waiting at the transit center. With full implementation of this transit plan (particularly changes to Route 2) additional bus bays will be required. In 2017 the SLO City Council adopted the Downtown Concept Plan which also envisions a relocated transit center on Higuera Street between Santa Rosa Street and Toro Street. In November of 2023 the SLO City Council approved the purchase of a property in this block on the northwest corner of Higuera Street and Toro Street (1166 Higuera Street). This is the same property identified in the 2012 Coordinated Downtown San Luis Obispo Transit Center Study as the preferred alternative to advance into environmental review (Alternative 6).

Initially this site is envisioned for parking. A transit center would require using the northern part of Higuera Street which is currently striped for parking and a bike lane and was previously one of three one-way travel lanes and parking.

Project development for a relocated transit center would need to involve close coordination between the City of SLO and RTA along with SLOCOG. This would include the development of joint funding applications, environmental clearance, design, project phasing and construction. A key feature not fully envisioned in the 2012 study is the addition of bus charging at bus bays. This will be important to support the transition to a BEB fleet by both SLO Transit and RTA.

FARE CHANGES
This SRTP does not recommend a fare increase for SLO Transit. SLO Transit fares are currently in line or above other peer agencies and a fare increase would not be consistent with the goals of the City Council to increase the transit mode split. Two fare strategies are recommended to encourage use of the transit system:
x Expand Downtown Access Program (DAP) – This provides free passes on SLO Transit for all people employed in the downtown area. The qualifying area should be extended to include all areas south of US 101, west of San Luis Obispo Creek, and north of Pismo Street. A southern extension from the downtown area encompasses all the area south of Pismo Street, west of the Union Pacific Railroad, and north of High Street. This includes the Railroad District. (Figure 24). x Simplify Day Pass Options – Simplify the fare structure by eliminating the five and seven-day passes.
x Cal-ITP Open-Loop Contactless Fare Payment System – Continue to work with SLOCOG on the implementation of fare payment technology which allows users to use any credit card/debit card/phone (open-loop) to pay for their bus trip.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 126

FINANCIAL PLAN
Table 28 presents the 5-Year Operating and Capital Financial Plan for SLO Transit. The SLO Transit service operating plan is fiscally constrained through FY 2027-28. Assuming use of reserve funds from the federal American Rescue Plan (ARPA) and flat growth of FTA funds after FY 2025-26, the service plan is funded through the planning period.

As shown in the table, sufficient revenue is available for planned capital projects including vehicle replacement and purchase with discretionary FTA grant funding. There is a small deficit in FY 2025-26 without discretionary grant funding. However, by the end of the planning period, it is anticipated that there will be a surplus of capital funds on the order of $2 million. This surplus could be put towards a new relocated transit center, replacing the refurbished buses with EV’s and other charging infrastructure.

As SLO Transit transitions to a zero-emission fleet, there are other potential funding sources available for electric vehicles. The Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP), administered by CARB, provides around $120,000 vouchers for large transit vehicle purchases. This program can help mitigate the cost between diesel and electric vehicles.

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 127
Table 28: SLO Transit Financial Plan (1/2)
FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32 Operating Revenues
Passenger fare revenue(1) $260,000 $265,200 $275,900 $292,800 $316,900 $349,900 $394,000 Cal Poly Transit Agreement (2) $750,000 $750,000 $772,500 $772,500 $772,500 $795,675 $795,675Interest $32,815 $22,648 $43,017 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000Transportation Development Act (TDA) - Local Transportation Fund (LTF) (3) $2,000,000 $2,024,000 $2,048,300 $2,072,900 $2,097,800 $2,123,000 $2,148,500 Transportation Development Act (TDA) - State Transit Assistance (STA) (3) $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 $725,000 Other State Grants $8,722 $8,722 $8,722 $8,700 $8,700 $8,700 $8,700FTA 5307 Preventative Maintenance(3) $210,765 $214,980 $219,280 $223,700 $228,200 $232,800 $237,500FTA 5307 Operating(3) $2,647,775 $3,049,800 $3,443,400 $3,554,000 $3,664,500 $3,762,713 $3,870,763 FTA 5307 CarryoverARPA Operating Assistance $2,701,956 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Operating Revenue $9,337,033 $7,060,350 $7,536,119 $7,692,600 $7,856,600 $8,040,788 $8,223,138 Available Operating Balance $0 $3,031,484 $2,977,034 $2,577,953 $2,097,253 $1,535,453 $905,240 Status Quo Operating Expenditures $5,724,249 $5,896,000 $6,072,900 $6,255,100 $6,442,800 $6,636,100 $6,835,200 SRTP Plan Elements $581,300 $1,218,800 $1,862,300 $1,918,200 $1,975,600 $2,034,900 $2,096,000 Balance $3,031,484 $2,977,034 $2,577,953 $2,097,253 $1,535,453 $905,240 $197,178 Potential funding source

SLO Transit 2024 – SRTP LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page 128
Table 28: SLO Transit Financial Plan (2/2)
FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32 Capital Revenues
FTA 5307 (Capital)(3) $2,693,785 $2,452,006 $1,803,083 $1,744,077 $1,668,803 $1,586,048 $1,477,998 State of Good Repair(2) $0 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 Capital Fund Balance -- -- $158,106 $181,889 $305,366 $352,669 $1,441,317 Total Capital Recurring Revenue $2,693,785 $2,455,006 $1,964,189 $1,928,966 $1,977,169 $1,941,717 $2,922,316 Discretionary Grant Funding $1,033,040 $572,880 $300,000 Capital Plan Expenditures Status Quo $2,859,800 $2,296,900 $1,782,300 $1,623,600 $1,624,500 $125,400 $126,600 New Vehicles Required for SRTP Plan4 $375,000
Capital Balance with no Discretionary Funding -$166,016 $158,106 $181,889 $305,366 $352,669 $1,441,317 $2,795,716 Capital Balance with Discretionary Funding $867,025 $158,106 $754,769 $305,366 $352,669 $1,741,317 $2,795,716 Source: FY 2024-25 Supplemental BudgetNote 1: Passenger fares escalated at the SLOCOG projected city population growth rate of 1% annually.Note 2: Based on City BudgetNote 3: Assumes FTA 5307 is used to pay for half of total operating expenses minus fare revenues. Total FTA 5307 projected at SLOCOG annual growth rate.Note 4: If microtransit pilot is successful and City decides to operate their own vehicles for the service.

MEMORANDUM
To: Alex Fuchs, City of San Luis Obispo
From: Genevieve Evans, AICP, LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Date: October 11, 2024
RE: Additional SLO Transit Service Alternatives to Better Serve Southern San Luis Obispo This memo provides LSC’s analysis of SLO Transit fixed route service options to better serve two new developments in the southern portion of San Luis Obispo, as well as to address other operational issues. A review of the new developments is first presented, followed by an evaluation of a series of transit service options.

New Developments
There are two major projects currently under development in the southern portion of San Luis Obispo that merit consideration for expanded transit service.

San Luis Ranch
At full buildout, the San Luis Ranch development along Madonna Road will include a total of 604 dwelling units. This includes 299 high-density housing units, 34 affordable housing units, and 83 medium-density units, all of which have a higher potential to generate transit ridership. The higher-density residential development is concentrated along Madonna Road and is already served by SLO Transit. Under an agreement with Cal Poly, up to 300 students will soon be living in this area.

As an aside, the nearest existing stops to the high-density area are located along Madonna Road within a reasonable 5-minute walk distance. While the westbound stop (just west of Dalido Drive has a shelter, the eastbound stop (just east of Oceanaire Drive does not. As this will be the stop used by Cal Poly students while waiting for a bus to campus, a shelter at this stop would be beneficial.

LSC TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC.

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND

TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
2690 Lake Forest Road, Suite C
Post Office Box 5875
Tahoe City, California 96145
(530) 583-4053
[email protected]
www.lsctrans.com

Additional SLO Transit Service Alternatives Page 2
Avila Ranch
Avila Ranch is a mixed-use residential/neighborhood commercial development under development along the north side of Buckley Road in southern San Luis Obispo. At buildout, it will include a total of 720 units, consisting of 125 higher-density units (24 units to the acre), 494 medium-density units (up to 20 units to the acre), and 101 lower-density units (7 units to the acre) as well as a small 15,000 square foot neighborhood commercial center.

The denser residential areas with the highest potential for transit ridership are in the northern portion of the site, along an extension of Eastwood Lane as well as along the east side of Horizon Lane in the northeast corner of the site. This development is at least a half-mile walk to the nearest existing SLO Transit stop (on South Higuera Street).

Service Alternatives
Alternatives are first presented that provide improved service to San Luis Ranch, as this project is farther along in the development process. Alternatives that also would serve Avila Ranch are presented next.

An important consideration in these alternatives beyond serving the new developments is addressing the existing poor service reliability of Routes 2A and 2B. LSC’s observations of on-time performance indicate that a majority (65 percent) of Route 2A runs are 6 or more minutes behind schedule, with 40 percent more than 15 minutes late. While Route 2B’s reliability is better, 49 percent of runs still operate at least 6 minutes land and 11 percent are more than 15 minutes late.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch –90 Minute Frequency One option to serve San Luis Ranch would be to revise Routes 2A and 2B to better serve the development by traveling along Froom Ranch Way between Dalido Drive and Los Osos Valley Road, rather than Madonna Road, as shown in Figure A. While Route 2 service to the stops near Madonna/Oceanaire would be eliminated, these stops would still be served by Route 3 (which currently generates 88 percent of the ridership at these stops). This would increase the Route 2A length by 0.8 miles while cutting 0.1 miles from Route 2B, respectively. To accommodate the additional running time as well as to solve the existing poor on-time performance, the route cycle time would be increased from 60 to 90 minutes. Operating the existing two buses would result in a 90-minute service frequency, which is typically considered a poor level of service for urban transit in mid-sized to larger urban areas.

As shown in Table A, this option would not change the annual vehicle hours used for Route 2 service (two buses would be in operation throughout the existing span of service). The net decrease in mileage would reduce operating costs by $61,500 per year.

This alternative would have several impacts on ridership:
• Service to San Luis Ranch would be improved. However, since much of the high-density housing is already served by the stops along Madonna Street, this would be a relatively modest ridership benefit.
• The improvement in on-time reliability would increase ridership, as passengers (and potential passengers) have been proven to be very sensitive to poor service reliability. The document Valuing Transit Service Quality Improvements (Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2023) indicates that “Increased transit travel speeds can be valued based on average time costs, but reliability improvements should be valued at a higher rate, reflecting the high costs of unexpected delay.

Each minute of delay beyond a “normal” two or three-minute delay should be valued at 3-5 times the standard in-vehicle travel time.” At present, Route 2A has about 10 minutes of excessive

Additional SLO Transit Service Alternatives Page 3
delay (on average) and Route 2B has about 5.5 minutes. This is perceived by the passenger as at least 30 minutes of travel time for Route 2A and 17 minutes for Route 2B. Providing a much more reliable transit service would therefore have a substantial ridership benefit. • Ridership would be reduced due to the reduction in frequency from 60 minutes to 90 minutes.

This can be found through elasticity analysis to have a moderate reduction in ridership. • The resulting service would no longer provide “clockface headways” whereby the bus serves any particular stop at the same time after each hour over the day. This has been found to be a substantial benefit to riders (and thus an increase in ridership) as it is easy to learn and remember service times. In addition, the current consistent transfer opportunities at the Transit Center would no longer be provided. Direct timed transfers would vary hour by hour, with an overall increase in the need to wait between buses. One strategy would be to schedule these runs to provide direction connections at the Transit Center to Route 4B in the AM hours and Route 4A in the PM hours, allowing trips to and from Cal Poly with minimal delays at the Transit Center.

Overall, however, the changed schedule would have a moderate additional reduction in ridership.

In sum, this alternative is forecast to increase Route 2 ridership by 11,000 passenger boardings per year, with the benefits of increased reliability and additional service to San Luis Ranch outweighing the reductions from reduced frequency and consistency of schedule.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch –45 Minute Frequency This option would be identical to the previous alternative, except that two additional buses would be used to provide service every 45 minutes. This would avoid the reduction in ridership associated with the change in headways and provide greater opportunity for connections at the Transit Center but at a substantial operating cost. As shown in Table A, a ridership increase of 65,000 boardings per year over existing ridership would be generated, but the annual operating cost would be increased by $462,600 and two additional buses would need to be in operation.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranchand Eliminate Descanso Street Loop–60Minute Frequency
Another option would be to revise Routes 2A and 2B to better serve San Luis Ranch but also eliminate the service along Los Osos Valley Road north of Froom Ranch Road to the turnabout loop using Prefumo Canyon Road, Del Rio Avenue, and Descanso Street. Eliminating service on this “Descanso Street Loop” would reduce the route length by 2.5 miles and reduce running time by approximately 7 minutes. This would solve roughly half of the existing on-time performance problem on Routes 2A and 2B if the routes are operated on the existing 60-minute cycle length. Annual operating costs would be reduced by $33,000.

All service would be eliminated to only two stops (along Del Rio Avenue at Profumo Canyon Road and at Descanso Street). Ridership at these stops is modest, totaling only roughly 7 passenger boardings per day.

These passengers would need to walk at least an additional 850 feet to access the nearest stop on Los Osos Valley Road. The stops along Los Osos Valley Road would still be served by Route 3, though service frequency would be reduced from four times per hour to two times per hour. Approximately 10,200 annual boardings currently generated by Route 2A/2B in this area would be eliminated. However, considering the ridership increase resulting from more reliable service throughout Routes 2A/2B and service to San Luis Ranch, the overall impact of this alternative would be a net increase of 18,000 passenger boardings per year.

Additional SLO Transit Service Alternatives Page 4

Additional SLO Transit Service Alternatives Page 5
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch –90 Minute Frequency By extending the Route 2 cycle length to 90 minutes, there would be more than adequate time to also extend the route to serve Avila Ranch, as shown in Figure A. To reduce the number of stops that would need to be established, both Routes 2A and 2B would serve a clockwise loop around Suburban Road, Eastwood Lane, the extension of Ventura Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, and Buckley Road and before returning north on South Higuera Street. Route 2A would be 14 miles in length while Route 2B would be 12.8 miles in length. This option would operate the same number of vehicle-hours of service as today, but the net effect of the fewer runs and longer route would be a reduction in annual vehicle-miles of 14,300, yielding a reduction in annual operating cost of $31,900. The net impact on ridership generated by the reduction in frequency, improved reliability, and additional service area would be an increase of 21,000 boardings per year.

Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch –45Minute Frequency Adding two additional buses into Route 2A/2B service would provide service along an expanded route every 45 minutes. Ridership would be increased by a substantial 80,000 boardings per year. However, annual operating costs would be increased by $514,700 and an additional two buses would be needed in operation.

Establish New Avila Ranch Direct Route –60 Minute Frequency Another option would be to establish a new route specifically to serve Avila Ranch. As shown in Figure B, this route would use the existing Route 2 alignment south from downtown along South Higuera Street and make a clockwise loop around Suburban Road, Eastwood Lane, the extension of Ventura Drive, the extension of Horizon Lane, Buckley Road, and Vachelli Lane before returning north on South Higuera Street. This route is 8.8 miles in length and can be reliably served in an hour cycle length.

Table A: SLO Transit - Additional Route Alternatives
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Marginal
Operating Cost
Cash Fare
Revenues
Operating
Subsidy
Additional
Vehicles
Needed
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch -
90 Minute Headways 11,000 0 -27,600 -$61,500 $11,000 -$72,500 0 Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch -
45 Minute Headways 65,000 7,500 38,600 $462,600 $65,100 $397,500 2 Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch &
Cut Descanso Loop - 60 Minute Headways 18,000 0 -14,800 -$33,000 $18,000 -$51,000 0 Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch
and Avila Ranch - 90 Minute Headways 21,000 0 -14,300 -$31,800 $21,000 -$52,800 0 Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch
and Avila Ranch - 45 Minute Headways 80,000 7,500 62,000 $514,700 $80,200 $434,500 2 New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute
Headway 34,800 5,300 49,300 $375,900 $34,900 $341,000 1 New Broad - Avila Ranch - S. Higuera Loop
Route -- 60 Minute Headway 53,000 8,400 87,400 $616,400 $53,100 $563,300 2 Change in Annual Service(2)

Additional SLO Transit Service Alternatives Page 6
In addition to providing service to Avila Ranch, this option has the benefit of doubling service along the South Higuera Street corridor which has substantial ridership (roughly 2.5 times the ridership along the Broad Street corridor along Routes 1A/1B). This route also could serve the Elks Lane/Prado Road loop off of S. Higuera Street currently served by Route 2A, thereby reducing running time and improving the ontime performance of Route 2A. Note that serving this loop in the northbound direction would require a traffic signal at Elks Lane / S. Higuera Street to allow buses to reliably turn onto S. Higuera Street northbound.

This option has the benefit of only requiring a single additional bus to serve Avila Ranch without resulting in a 90-minute service frequency. Assuming service is provided over the same span as the existing Route 2A span, annual operating costs would be increased by $375,900, while ridership would be increased by 34,800 boardings per year.

Broad Street / Tank Farm Road / S. Higuera Loop Route to Serve Avila Ranch A final option would be to create a large bi-directional route using Broad Street between the Transit Center and Tank Farm Road, Tank Farm Road, Long Street, Cross Street, and Short Street to access the Avila Ranch area and South Higuera Street to the Transit Center. As shown in Figure B, this route is 10.4 miles long, though the relatively high speeds along the long stretch of Tank Farm Road with no ridership potential would allow it to operate in a 60-minute cycle length.

It is assumed that one direction would be operated over the same span as Route 2A and the other over the same span as Route 2B, resulting in an annual operating cost of $616,400. Two additional buses would be required at peak times.

Ridership would be generated by providing half-hourly service along both the Broad Street and South Higuera Street corridors, by serving Avila Ranch, as well as by providing a new more convenient connection for transit travel between southwest and southeast San Luis Obispo. Overall, ridership is forecast to increase by 53,000 boardings per year.

Additional SLO Transit Service Alternatives Page 7

Additional SLO Transit Service Alternatives Page 8
Service Alternatives Performance Analysis
Table B presents an evaluation of the performance of the additional service alternatives. This follows the methodology discussed in Technical Memorandum Four: Service Alternatives and applies the performance standards of a minimum of 11.5 passenger-trips per vehicle-hour and marginal operating costs that do not exceed $11.23 per passenger-trip. A review of these results indicates the following:
• All of these alternatives meet the cost-effectiveness standard with the exception of the Broad Street – Avila Ranch – South Higuera loop route.
• The three options that increase ridership while not adding vehicle-hours (90-minute service to San Luis Ranch, 60-minute service to San Luis Ranch and cutting the Descanso loop, and 90- minute service to San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch) perform particularly well as they reduce costs (by reducing vehicle-miles of service) while expanding ridership. These three options also help meet overall service productivity standards by increasing ridership without adding vehicle-hours. • Of the options that serve Avila Ranch while avoiding 90-minute service frequency, the best performance is provided by the 45-minute service on an expanded Route 2A/2B. While the productivity figure of 10.7 passenger-trips per vehicle-hour does not achieve the standard of

11.5, it is close.
• A new direct route along South Higuera Street serving Avila Ranch would have slightly better performance than the large bi-directional loop using South Higuera Street, Tank Farm Road, and Broad Street, and would be substantially less expensive. However, this cannot be implemented until a new traffic signal is in place at Elks Road and S. Higuera.

Table B: Additional Service Alternatives Performance Analysis Annual
Ridership
Service
Hours
Service
Miles
Annual Marginal
Operating Cost 1
PassengerTrips per
Vehicle
Service Hour
Marginal Op.

Cost per
PassengerTrip
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 90
Minute Headways 11,000 0 -27,600 -$61,500 Note 2 -$5.59 Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch - 45
Minute Headways 65,000 7,500 38,600 $462,600 8.7 $7.12
Revise Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch & Cut
Descanso Loop - 60 Minute Headways 18,000 0 -14,800 -$33,000 Note 2 -$1.83 Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila
Ranch - 90 Minute Headways 21,000 0 -14,300 -$31,800 Note 2 -$1.51 Extend Route 2A/2B to Serve San Luis Ranch and Avila
Ranch - 45 Minute Headways 80,000 7,500 62,000 $514,700 10.7 $6.43 New Avila Ranch Direct Route -- 60 Minute Headway 34,800 5,300 49,300 $375,900 6.6 $10.80 New Broad - Avila Ranch - S. Higuera Loop Route -- 60
Minute Headway 53,000 8,400 87,400 $616,400 6.3 $11.63
Recommended
Performance
Standards

11.5 $11.23
Note 1: Does not include fixed costs
Note 2: As there is an increase in ridership with no change in vehicle-hours, this measure calculates as infinite.

Net Impact
Alternatives meeting performance standards shaded in green. Note that alternatives meet standards by increasing ridership at a greater rate than costs, eliminating a service not meeting standards, or increasing ridership while decreasing costs.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G
1 Appendix G

JOINT COORDINATION OPPORTUNITIES

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G2
Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION
This is the eighth in a series of working papers prepared as part of the Joint Short-Range Transit Plan study for the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) and the City of San Luis Obispo’s transit program (SLO Transit). This working paper focuses on opportunities to better coordinate the two transit programs, building on the opportunity provided by this joint SRTP process.

As an introduction, it should be noted that there is a long history of coordination between the transit services. The intention and mechanism for coordination was formalized in 2003 via an agreement between SLOCOG, the City of SLO, and the RTA regarding public transit planning and programming. This document specifies that SLOCOG and the two operators “agree to work cooperatively with each other and with other public and private transit providers and governmental agencies to ensure the provision of coordinated, cost‐effective, area‐wide transit services. Such coordination includes, to the extent feasible: fares; operating service agreements; transfer rates and pass policies; transit information and marketing; schedule and service coordination; capital needs; shared support facilities; data needs to meet period reporting requirement; and other activities as agreed upon by the parties.” (Section 2). This working paper is intended to build on this cooperative spirit by considering improvements to services jointly undertaken by both agencies, such as Runabout, as well as explore or expand opportunities for coordination which maximize cost-effectiveness.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G3
Chapter 2

RTA/SLO TRANSIT COORDINATION OPPORTUNITIES
This chapter focuses on joint procurement opportunities and discusses intercity connections and day-today operational coordination. This is followed by a list of strategies to improve the effectiveness of the ADA Paratransit program, Runabout, which serves both the City and the County.

SERVICE COORDINATION
RTA Routes 9, 10, 12, and 14 operate within the City of San Luis Obispo and have some overlap with SLO Transit in order to make transfers with SLO Transit and to directly serve key locations within the City of San Luis Obispo for intercity RTA passengers. This includes 3 stops on the Cal Poly SLO campus. RTA serves 31 bus stops within the City of San Luis Obispo, 22 of which are shared with SLO Transit. RTA’s main passenger transfer hub is the Government Center which is located at the opposite corner of the intersection of Palm Street and Osos Street from the SLO Downtown Transit Center. Route 14 service was reduced during the pandemic and is currently not operating (October 2024) because Cuesta College has moved many classes online.

Scheduling and Transfer Opportunities
Hours of Operation
On weekdays during the academic year, SLO Transit bi-directional loop routes begin service at the Downtown Transit Center before the first morning 6:33 AM RTA departures from the Government Center and continue service until after the 8:33 PM RTA departures. RTA Route 12 has a 10:06 PM arrival at the Government Center before it goes out of service for the night. Only SLO Routes 3B, 4A, and 4B continue operating after that last RTA arrival.

Both systems operate reduced service hours on weekends beginning later and ending earlier. SLO Transit operates only the “A” clockwise routes on the same schedule for both Saturday and Sunday. RTA operates Routes 9, 10, and 12 with five round trips on Saturday. On Sunday, Routes 9 and 10 operate three runs and Route 12 operates five runs.

Figure 1 and Table 1 display the span of service for both systems. These show that the service times between both systems align reasonably well. The transfer opportunities between both systems are described below. Table 2 provides an example of schedule coordination for a two-hour period on a weekday during the academic year. Appendix A presents schedule coordination for a full-service day.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G4
Academic Year - Weekend Span of Service Is Shaded
1A 1B 2A 2B 3A 3B 4A 4B 9 10 12
6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6:15 AM 6:20 AM 6:00 AM 6:15 AM
6:30 AM 6:45 AM 6:45 AM 6:45 AM 6:33 AM 6:33 AM 6:33 AM 7:00 AM
7:30 AM
8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:15 AM 8:15 AM
8:30 AM 8:23 AM 8:28 AM 8:25 AM
9:00 AM Saturday Saturday Saturday
9:30 AM 9:23 AM 9:28 AM 9:25 AM
10:00 AM Sunday Sunday Sunday
10:30 AM
11:00 AM
11:30 AM
12:00 PM No No No No
12:30 PM Weekend Weekend Weekend Weekend
1:00 PM Service Service Service Service
1:30 PM
2:00 PM
2:30 PM
3:00 PM
3:30 PM
4:00 PM
4:30 PM 5:33 PM 5:33 PM 5:33 PM
5:00 PM Sunday Sunday Sunday
5:30 PM
6:00 PM
6:30 PM 6:30 PM 6:35 PM 7:33 PM 7:33 PM 7:33 PM
7:00 PM Saturday Saturday Saturday
7:30 PM
8:00 PM 8:00 PM 8:05 PM 8:10 PM 8:05 PM
8:30 PM 8:33 PM 8:33 PM
9:00 PM
9:30 PM
10:00 PM 10:00 PM 10:00 PM 10:00 PM 10:06 PM
10:30 PM 10:35 PM 10:30 PM
11:00 PM 11:05 PM
Figure 1: Span of Service - SLO Transit & RTA Routes 9, 10 and 12 at Downtown Transit Center/Government Center 30-Minute
Period
SLO Transit Routes RTA Routes
Academic Year
Weekday 1A 1B 2A 2B 3A 3B 4A 4B 9 10 12
Begin 6:15 AM 6:45 AM 6:15 AM 6:45 AM 6:20 AM 6:45 AM 6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6:33 AM 6:33 AM 6:33 AM End 10:00 PM 6:30 PM 10:00 PM 6:35 PM 10:00 PM 10:35 PM 11:05 PM 10:30 PM 8:33 PM 8:33 PM 10:06 PM Span (Hours) 15:45 11:45 15:45 11:50 15:40 15:50 17:05 16:15 14:00 14:00 15:33 Saturday
Begin 8:15 AM 8:15 AM 6:20 AM 8:15 AM 8:23 AM 8:28 AM 8:25 AM End 8:00 PM 8:05 PM 8:10 PM 8:05 PM 7:33 PM 7:33 PM 7:33 PM Span (Hours) 11:45 11:50 13:50 11:50 11:10 11:05 11:08
Sunday
Begin 8:15 AM 8:15 AM 6:20 AM 8:15 AM 9:23 AM 9:28 AM 9:25 AM End 8:00 PM 8:05 PM 8:10 PM 8:05 PM 5:33 PM 5:33 PM 5:33 PM Span (Hours) 11:45 11:50 13:50 11:50 8:10 8:05 8:08
SLO Transit Routes RTA Routes
Table 1: Span of Service - SLO Transit & RTA Routes 9, 10 and 12 at Downtown Transit Center/Government Center

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G5
Transfers between SLO Transit and RTA
This review of transfer opportunities examines the coordination between RTA routes 9, 10, and 12 serving San Luis Obispo and the all-day, bi-directional SLO Transit routes (1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B).

Ideally, the service schedule would enable transfers to and from all route buses. Because the combined schedules of the two systems are not designed as a pulse schedule, where timetables are coordinated to converge at the Government Center and Downtown Transit Center at the same time, passengers on an incoming bus may need to wait to transfer to the next arrival of a bus from the other system. Described below are the transfer options between RTA and SLO Transit routes. Since both systems operate on generally consistent headways throughout the day, the transfer times repeat in a similar fashion each hour. On weekdays RTA operates on 60-minute headways. SLO operates on 30-, 45- and 60-minute headways depending on the route and time of day, which can make the exact transfer times vary depending on the hour. Appendix A of this working paper displays the times that each route bus is present at the Government Center/Downtown Transit Center in 15-minute increments for full weekday service during the academic year. Appendix B provides a series of tables depicting transfer times at selected times as described below.

Weekdays During Academic Year
RTA Routes
1A 1B 2A 2B 3A 3B 4A 4B 9 10 12
11:40 AM
11:45 AM
11:50 AM
11:55 AM
11:10 AM
11:15 AM
11:20 AM
11:25 AM
11:30 AM
11:35 AM
11:05 AM
10:10 AM
10:15 AM
10:20 AM
10:25 AM
10:30 AM
10:35 AM
10:40 AM
10:45 AM
10:50 AM
10:55 AM
11:00 AM
10:05 AM
TABLE 2: Example of Existing Schedule Coordination
at Government Center/Downtown Transfer Point
5-Minute Period
Start
SLO Transit Routes
10:00 AM

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G6
Weekday Morning Service: RTA Routes 9, 10, and 12 start operations at the Government Center at 6:33 AM. SLO Transit’s bi-directional routes (1, 2, 3, and 4 – A and B) begin service at the Downtown Transit Center between 6:00 AM and 6:45 AM. The first transfer opportunity between the two systems occurs before the three RTA route departures at 7:33 AM. Six of the eight SLO Transit routes complete a loop before the 7:33 AM RTA departures, allowing passengers to transfer to RTA inter-city routes. The two SLO Transit routes that do not complete a loop are 2B and 3B operating in the counter-clockwise direction, but Routes 2A and 3A do complete a clockwise loop of the same route and return to the Transit Center before the RTA 7:33 AM departures. The first morning RTA routes with passengers are scheduled to arrive at 7:12 AM (Route 12), 7:24 AM (Route 9), and 7:28 AM (Route 10) at the Government Center. Route 9 Express arrives at 7:27 AM. Shortly after, SLO Transit route 4A departs at 7:30 AM, and routes 1B, 2B, 3B, and 4B depart at 7:45 AM. Routes 1A and 2A leave at 7:15 AM, which allows for potential transfers from RTA Route 12, scheduled to arrive at 7:12 AM. Route 3A departs at 7:20 AM, providing a reasonable window for passengers transferring from Route 12. The only SLO Transit routes that facilitate transfers to and from all three RTA routes are 1B and 4A, which share dwell time at the Government Center/Downtown Transit Center hub.

One noteworthy observation is that SLO Transit Route 4A is scheduled to complete its first loop from 6:00 AM to 6:35 AM at the Downtown Transit Center, missing the scheduled transfer opportunity for the first RTA intercity departures at 6:33 AM by just two minutes.

Since this is the first morning run, it may be possible to adjust the public timetable to allow the Route 4A to arrive at 6:30 AM to allow passengers to transfer to the 6:33 AM RTA departures.

Weekday Midday Service: Transfers between both systems are available for the entire day.

The pattern does not repeat identically throughout the day because SLO Transit Routes 3A and 3B change headways midday. Route 3A runs more frequently during the first half of the day and Route 3B runs more frequently during the second half of the day.

The transfer pattern midday is like both the morning and late-night transfers as described in this section. One significant difference is that the five arrivals of RTA Route 9 from 2:30 PM to 6:30 PM have a much shorter scheduled layover of only three minutes versus 15 minutes earlier and later in the day. This makes transfers in both directions between Route 9 and SLO Transit routes unlikely during this 4-hour period of the day. For example, Route 4A and 4B combined have 2:30 PM, 4:30 PM, and 5:30 PM departures scheduled at the same time RTA Route 9 is scheduled to arrive. There is not enough shared dwell time on these runs to allow for transfers in both directions. The reason for the shorter layover is that RTA serves the Cal Poly Campus directly on those five runs, which also has the effect of reducing the need for those passengers to make a transfer to SLO Transit. The Draft SRTP recommends one additional mid-day arrival at the Cal Poly campus on Southbound Route 9 at 12:17 PM.

SLO Routes 1B and 2B are in service until 6:30 PM and 6:35 PM respectively and have transfers available at those times as they do in the morning example above.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G7
Weekday Night Service: The last nighttime departures for RTA Routes 9, 10, and 12 are at 8:33 PM from the Government Center. During the academic year, SLO Transit operates six of its eight routes after 8:33 PM, allowing for transfers to the RTA intercity routes. Routes 1B and 2B, which operate in the counterclockwise direction, end service at 6:30 PM and 6:35 PM, respectively. However, the clockwise counterparts—1A and 2A—operate until 10:00 PM. SLO Transit routes arrive between 8:00 PM and 8:20 PM, enabling transfers to the last RTA departures. SLO Transit Route 3B has an 8:40 PM scheduled arrival at the Downtown Transit Center after the departure of the RTA buses, meaning passengers wanting to transfer to the RTA routes need to take Route 3A, which arrives at 8:10 PM, or the earlier Route 3B that arrives at 7:40 PM. SLO Route 4B is on a layover from 8:20 PM to 8:30 PM allowing Route 4B passengers to transfer to all three RTA routes departing at 8:33 PM. RTA Route 9 has a scheduled stop at the Cal Poly SLO campus on the 8:33 departure which means that RTA passengers that are travelling to the campus do not need to transfer to a SLO Transit bus at that time. RTA Route 10 and 12 passengers can transfer to RTA Route 9 to get to the Cal Poly SLO campus for the 8:33 PM departure.

Transfers from the last RTA arrivals at the Government Center to SLO Transit are available across the full SLO Transit system, though they are less convenient. The last scheduled RTA arrivals are at 8:18 PM for Route 9, 8:28 PM for Route 10, and 8:06 PM for Route 12. Six SLO Transit routes are in service at these arrival times during the academic year (Routes 1B and 2B end service by 6:35 PM). Four of the SLO routes (1A, 2A, 3A, 4A) have scheduled departures at 8:15 PM, allowing for transfers only from RTA Route 12. Route 4B has an 8:30 PM departure, which can accommodate transfers from all three RTA routes. The 8:28 PM arrival of Route 10 allows only two minutes for passengers to transfer to 4B, assuming everything is on schedule. Route 3B departs at 8:45 PM, providing ample time for transfers from all three RTA routes, but this results in waiting times ranging from 39 to 17 minutes. Passengers from RTA Routes 9 and 10 must wait until 9:00 PM for the next SLO route 4A departure, resulting in a 42- and 32-minute wait from the scheduled arrivals of Routes 9 and 10, respectively. SLO routes 1A, 2A, and 3A leave at 9:15 PM, resulting in a 57- and 47-minute wait for passengers arriving on Routes 9 and 10. Route 12, with its scheduled 8:06 PM arrival, shares 9 minutes of dwell time at the Government Center with SLO Routes 1A, 2A, 3A, and 4A at the Downtown Transit Center allowing for transfer in passengers between both systems between 8:06 PM and 8:15 PM.

During the summer schedule, SLO Transit routes end service between two to four hours earlier, making transfers with the last RTA departures unavailable.

Saturday Morning Service: The first departure of RTA Routes 9, 10, and 12 on Saturday morning is at 8:33 AM. Only SLO Transit Route 3A has completed a loop in time to bring passengers to the Downtown Transit Center in time to transfer to the three RTA Routes. The next departures of SLO Transit routes 1A, 2A, 3A, and 4A take place between 9:00 AM and 9:20 AM for intercity passengers who arrive on RTA routes and wish to transfer to SLO Transit.

The wait time for passengers transferring from one of the RTA routes to SLO Transit at that time ranges from 32 to 57 minutes.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G8
Saturday Midday Service: RTA routes 9, 10, and 12 make only five runs on Saturday, while SLO Transit runs 60-minute headways on Routes 1A, 2A, and 3A; and 45-minute headways on Route 4A. This means there are multiple runs per day on SLO Transit where there is no transfer available to or from RTA Routes 9, 10, and 12.

Saturday Night Service: The last Saturday nighttime departures for RTA Routes 9, 10, and 12 are at 7:33 PM from the Government Center. On Saturdays, SLO Transit Routes 1A, 2A, and 3A complete their last loops at 7:15 PM, so incoming RTA passengers are not able to transfer to those routes on the last Saturday run. Transfers in both directions are possible between RTA routes 9, 10, 12, and SLO Transit Route 4A, which has a scheduled 7:20 PM arrival and a 7:30 PM departure for its last loop of the night. The scheduled arrival time of RTA Route 10 is 7:28 PM, making the transfer to SLO Route 4A tight.

Sunday Service: SLO Transit operates the same schedule on Saturday and Sunday. However, RTA Routes 9, and 10 operate only three runs and Route 12 operates 5 runs. Transfers between systems are similar to Saturday, but at different times because the three RTA routes start an hour later and end two hours later than on Saturday. The first RTA departure from the Government Center is 9:33 AM and the last is 5:33 PM.

Opportunities for Improvement of Transfers
As both RTA and SLO Transit adjust their routes and schedules, prioritizing convenient transfers between systems to minimize wait times should be a key consideration. However, balancing these adjustments to accommodate transfers with the needs of passengers who do not require them presents challenges.

Long-distance intercity RTA routes, in particular, have scheduled transfers in other communities that must be maintained, especially when operating on 60-minute headways. In a survey conducted in October 2023, 48 percent of RTA Regional Route passengers rated the “ease of transfers/connections” as excellent, with an average score of 4.2 out of five. In comparison, 37 percent of SLO Transit passengers provided a similar rating, averaging 3.9 out of five.

According to on-board surveys from October 2023, only 5 percent of RTA passengers on Routes 9, 10, and 12 transferred to SLO Transit to complete their trip, while just under 4 percent of SLO Transit respondents required a transfer to those same RTA routes. Notably, the proportion of passengers transferring between SLO Transit and RTA has increased by 6 percent since 2015 (time period of the last SRTP). Although enhancing inter-system transfers may not be the highest priority, strategically improving connections on the most heavily utilized routes could boost rider satisfaction and expand the intercity ridership market.

Key takeaways regarding transfer opportunities between the two systems are:

Timing Coordination: The combined schedules of RTA and SLO Transit are not designed as a pulse system, where routes are timed to arrive and depart at the Government Center and Downtown Transit Center at the same time. While service times generally align well, particularly during morning and midday hours when all eight SLO Transit routes are in

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G9
operation, there are still missed opportunities for transfers between systems. For example, Route 4A misses early RTA departures by just two minutes, highlighting areas for potential improvement.

Evening Service Gaps: Although many SLO Transit routes continue to operate after RTA's last departures, significant waiting times can occur for passengers transferring from RTA Routes 9 and 10, reducing convenience for late-night passengers. Additionally, SLO Routes 1B and 2B cease service by 6:35 PM, further limiting options.

Seasonal Variability: The reduction in service hours during the summer schedule restricts transfer opportunities, particularly for late arrivals and departures. This inconsistency can adversely affect commuters throughout the year. This could be improved under the “Operate Academic Schedule Year-Round” alternative for SLO Transit.

Central Transit Hub: The absence of a central transit hub capable of accommodating at least 11 full-size (40-foot) buses simultaneously poses a significant constraint on the system. As a result, SLO Transit must stagger the schedules of the eight buses in service, preventing all from pulsing into the hub at the same time.

JOINT TRANSIT FACILITIES
Operations and Maintenance Facilities
RTA and SLO Transit operate from separate facilities in San Luis Obispo that are located within one-third of a mile of one another. RTA completed the construction of their facility on Elks Lane in 2022. The City of SLO Transit facility on Prado Road was built in 1984. Both RTA and SLO Transit have capital improvements planned for battery electric bus (BEB) charging infrastructure at their facilities.

The proximity of the operations and maintenance facilities provides opportunities for coordination of parts inventory, which has been in practice for several years. In addition, vehicle charging and training can be more easily coordinated with the close proximity of the facilities. This will be particularly important as both agencies transition into battery electric bus fleets.

Relocated Transit Center
The primary passenger transfer hub in San Luis Obispo is centered on the intersection of Osos Street and Palm Street. The SLO Transit buses stop in five sawtooth bays on the west side of Osos Street north of Palm Street. This is identified as the “Transit Center” by SLO Transit. RTA buses stop on the east side of Osos Street south of Palm Street. This is identified as the “Government Center” by RTA. Up to three RTA buses board and alight passengers there at one time. There is room for a fourth RTA bus around the corner on the south side of Palm Street, that is currently used as a deboarding area during operator shift changes and for express runs. In 2020, RTA completed significant improvements to their portion of the Government Center facility adding a passenger waiting area, two additional shelters, lighting, a ticket vending machine, display boards, and real-time bus arrival digital displays.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G10
The 2016 SRTP noted that SLOCOG was leading an effort to construct a new enhanced transit center on Higuera Street between Santa Rosa Street and Toro Street. In 2012, the Coordinated Downtown San Luis Obispo Transit Center Study envisioned a facility consisting of up to 16 bus bays, indoor/outdoor passenger waiting areas, driver break areas, restrooms, and a transit information counter. The larger transit center would allow for more buses to be able to pulse in and out of the transit center which would enable enhanced route timing coordination. In 2017, the SLO City Council adopted the Downtown Concept Plan which also envisions a relocated transit center on Higuera Street between Santa Rosa Street and Toro Street. In November of 2023, the SLO City Council approved the purchase of a property in this block on the northwest corner of Higuera Street and Toro Street (1166 Higuera Street).

This is the same property identified in the 2012 Coordinated Downtown San Luis Obispo Transit Center Study as the preferred alternative to advance into environmental review (Alternative 6).

It is recommended that the RTA, City of SLO, and SLOCOG resume project development for a relocated transit center. This would include the development of joint funding applications, environmental clearance, design, project phasing, and construction. A lead agency for environmental clearance, project approvals, and construction would need to be agreed upon to initiate the project development. Both the City of SLO and RTA are capable of being the lead agency for the project. A new Downtown Transit Center which has the capacity for a minimum of11 buses at one time would allow for better transfers not only between SLO Transit Routes but also between SLO Transit and RTA routes. Additional bays – up to 16 per the 2012 Downtown Coordinated Downtown San Luis Obispo Transit Center Study – would allow for full transfers with express buses and other potential intercity routes. A key feature not fully envisioned in the 2012 study is the addition of bus charging at bus bays. This will be important to support the transition to a BEB fleet by both SLO Transit and RTA.

JOINT PROCUREMENT OPPORTUNITIES
A joint procurement is a method of contracting in which two or more purchasers agree from the outset to use a single solicitation document (Request for Proposals – RFP) to enter into a single contract with a vendor for the delivery of goods or services in a fixed quantity with jointly developed technical specifications. The purchasers in a joint procurement process may also enter into individual contracts.

FTA and Caltrans will review joint procurements to ensure that the RFP expresses a minimum and potential maximum order based on the reasonably expected needs of the participating agencies. One agency would agree to be the lead agency for joint procurements and would take the responsibility of ensuring compliance with FTA and Caltrans requirements.

Bus Procurement
Both the City of SLO and RTA are participating agencies in the California Association of Coordinated Transportation (CalACT) transit purchasing cooperative. The procurement process for the CalACT cooperative is led by the Morongo Basin Transit Authority (MBTA). The MBTA recently completed a heavy-duty bus procurement (RFP #23-01) for the consortium. In July 2024, MBTA issued an intent to award contracts to Gillig, New Flyer, and Motor Coach Industries (MCI) for diesel, compressed natural gas, battery-electric, and fuel-cell electric buses. This procurement includes 35’ and 40’ transit buses, and 45’ commuter buses.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G11
Bus purchases include the selection of multiple different optional features including seating, flooring, destination signs, wheelchair restraints, and many more. For shared parts and training, it would be useful for SLO Transit and RTA to coordinate on selection of optional features.

Technology
Both RTA and SLO transit have technology projects in their capital improvement programs. The SLO Transit Innovation Study places a high priority on replacing the CAD/AVL and APC systems to incorporate more state-of-the-art technology. The capital improvement program includes funding in FY 2027/28 to replace the system. There may be an opportunity to procure systems jointly with RTA, which has a CAD/AVL technology contract that expires in 2026.

If microtransit is implemented in both systems, a joint procurement of the technology provider would be a strategic way to implement new technology for both operations. System parameters, policies, and operations can be implemented separately by both agencies under the same technology. A specific example of this is with Placer County Transit, Roseville Transit, and Auburn Transit which implemented a joint procurement in 2022. The RFP resulted in six proposals. Placer County was the lead agency for the procurement.

Having common technology vendors, software and hardware would be beneficial for parts, training, and scheduling installations, maintenance, and repairs.

Passenger Shelters
Both RTA and SLO will be improving bus stops over the seven-year planning period. This will involve the addition and replacement of passenger shelters and amenities at certain bus stops. In some cases, the improvements may be within the City of San Luis Obispo for stops served by both systems. A joint procurement of shelters and related passenger amenities would be advantageous. In addition to leading large-scale bus procurement, the CalACT transit purchasing cooperative has a contract in place with Tolar Manufacturing. The contract includes different sizes and styles of shelters, seating, lighting, map holders, and digital real-time arrival signs – among other accessories. This contract can be in place through October of 2027 if all three one-year extensions are executed. RTA has used and plans to continue to use this contract for passenger shelter purchases. This is an option an ongoing opportunity for both RTA and SLO to a jointly procure passenger shelters. .

JOINT GRANT APPLICATIONS
RTA and SLO Transit recently coordinated on a joint application for discretionary FTA 5339 funds along with Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transportation District and Santa Cruz Metro. The application was titled Electrifying the California Central Coast. Both RTA and Santa Barbara were successful in receiving funding from this submittal. RTA will receive $2.6 million toward the purchase of four BEBs to replace aging diesel buses. Prior to this grant, the RTA submitted a FTA 5339 grant that awarded funding for five BEBs for RTA and six BEB’s for SLO Transit.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G12
When practical, RTA and SLO Transit should consider joint applications for discretionary funding at the Federal and State levels to increase competitiveness. This helps secure the support of local representatives at both levels along with support from important entities within the region. Joint applications would be particularly useful for projects and initiatives that both agencies coordinate such as joint procurement of buses, charging infrastructure, bus stop/transit center improvements, and technology.

RUNABOUT STRATEGIES
Runabout is the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) complementary paratransit service for people with disabilities. This is the sole ADA complementary paratransit service for San Luis Obispo County. The service is operated by the RTA and meets the ADA paratransit requirements for all fixedroute transit service operators in the County. The San Luis Obispo region has accomplished a significant coordination step by establishing this single regional ADA service.

Cost of Americans with Disabilities Paratransit Service Runabout is an effective service meeting the needs of passengers who are not able to use fixed routes due to disabilities. RTA has continued to meet on-time performance standards for Runabout and its other demand-responsive services. Runabout service is on-time if the vehicle arrives within 30 minutes of the appointed pick-up time. The goal is 95 percent or higher. Runabout surpassed this goal in Fiscal Year 2022-23 with a 99 percent on-time average. This exceeds the on-time performance of RTA fixed routes which achieved 88 percent in fiscal year 2022-23.

The cost of operating ADA paratransit service is relatively high on a per-passenger basis compared to other general public transit services. This is true for Runabout as well. In Fiscal Year 2022/2023 the Runabout subsidy per passenger was $146 compared to $11.81 for RTA fixed route services and $5.63 for SLO Transit fixed routes. In Fiscal Year 2022/2023 the Runabout operating cost was $3.43 million which represents 26 percent of the RTA systemwide costs. The annual ridership of 22,963 represented only three percent of the systemwide ridership. The high cost and low productivity of ADA paratransit service are typical for all public transit agencies, especially those ADA paratransit systems that operate across both rural and small urban areas. As ridership continues to increase coming out of the effects of the pandemic, RTA has been able to decrease the subsidy per passenger by 20 percent to $138.73 per passenger based on pre-audited Fiscal Year 2023-24 data.

The 2016 Short Range Transit plan noted that one of the factors driving the growth of Runabout operating costs is the increasing average length of passenger trips. Factors leading to this were noted as changes in healthcare and overall greater mobility among seniors and people with disabilities. Based on Runabout trip samples taken from October 1 to October 14, 2023, 54 percent of Runabout trips were taken between two different communities. Average trip lengths on Runabout in FY 2023-24 were 12 miles. The average trip length of all demand response peers in Working Paper #2 is 6 miles. Only one peer operator – Yolo Bus – has a demand response average trip length greater than RTA at 13 miles.

Yolo Bus, like RTA, offers paratransit service within ¾ miles of all fixed routes, including long-distance intercity routes. RTA operates long-distance regional fixed routes totaling 422 directional route miles (DRM) over a very large geographic service area. The DRM of the nine peer operators in Working Paper

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G13
#2 averages 312. RTA has the second highest DRM after Monterey-Salinas Transit, which has 448 DRM.

These long trips can require long dead-head travel which contributes to the high subsidy per passenger and high cost per vehicle revenue hour.

Cost Reduction Measures
While rebounding ridership is bringing down the cost per passenger, the overall cost of providing Runabout service is still a concern to RTA. RTA has already implemented some substantive strategies to reduce the cost of service. It is recommended that RTA continue to monitor the service and pursue additional cost-reduction measures.

Cost Reduction Measures Implemented
RTA has implemented several measures to reduce or contain the costs of Runabout service. RTA eliminated general public service on Runabout over a decade ago. RTA has also implemented a threeyear recertification process to ensure that they are only providing service to ADA-eligible passengers. A no-show policy is in place to reduce the number of riders who book trips but fail to show up for the ride.

In the fiscal year 2022-23, there were only 279 no-shows on Runabout, which is only 1.2% of the Runabout ridership that year.

RTA, SLO transit and other fixed-route operators in the County offer rides to ADA passengers on fixed routes at no cost to the rider, although RTA reimburses SLO Transit and Morro Bay Transit for free rides as spelled out in cooperative agreements with both agencies. This is meant to encourage ADA passengers to use the fixed route services and require fewer Runabout trips. In Fiscal Year 2022-23, there were 15,695 free ADA boardings which was 68 percent of the Runabout ridership that year. In Fiscal Year 2023-24 there were 15,875 free ADA boardings which was 59 percent of Runabout ridership.

Based on these relatively high levels of ADA-eligible passenger ridership on fixed routes, the program appears to be effective and should continue to be promoted as both an added benefit for ADA-eligible passengers and as a cost-reduction measure for Runabout.

Additional Cost Reduction Measures Considered
RTA has considered other measures including subsidized taxi or Transportation Network Company (TNC) rides, reducing the seven-day booking window, and instituting call-backs for next-day rides. • TNC Subsidized Rides – Transit agencies have begun partnering with TNCs such as Uber and Lyft to supplement existing services. This is a common solution to provide passenger service outside of regular operating hours in areas where TNC service is generally available. TNC service is also a good first/last-mile solution for bus passengers. It is common for the agency to subsidize up to a certain amount of the trip cost and the rider pays the rest. This can be done by working with the TNC to establish a promotion code specific to the transit agency. For Example, Marin Transit has implemented a TNC program known as Catch-A-Ride that allows eligible riders to receive up to eight one-way rides per month at a $14 per ride discount for general riders and $18 for lowincome riders. • Reducing Booking Window – The current RTA policy for Runabout is to permit riders to schedule trips up to seven days in advance, although the ADA only requires next-day scheduling. The longer booking window of seven days is a good customer service feature but can have some

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G14
disadvantages such as an increased potential for no-shows, and the need to adjust trips based on fluctuations in trip demand.
• Call-backs for next-day rides – This practice would allow schedulers to optimize scheduling for trips for the next service days. Schedulers would need to call each rider back for the next service day to tell the passenger what their scheduled pick-up is for the next day.

Coordination with Human Service Transportation
The San Luis Obispo County Coordinated Human Services Public Transportation Plan (CHSPTP) completed by SLOCOG in 2022 includes implementation strategies to coordinate between human service transportation programs and services operated by RTA and SLO Transit. While there are multiple non-profit and human service transportation programs (See Working Paper #1) Ride-On Transportation and Senior Go! are the services that RTA and SLO transit focus their coordination efforts with.

Ride-On serves as a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) in San Luis Obispo and in that role provides door-to-door shuttle service for seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, and social service agencies. Senior Go! is a transportation service available to seniors aged 65 and older in San Luis Obispo County. Senior Go! is a SLOCOG program. SLOCOG has designated the RTA as a CTSA for the purpose of passing funding for the program through the RTA. The service is operated by Ventura Transportation Systems Inc. (VTS) and is managed by SLOGOG.

Customer Facing Technology
The CHSPTP recommends improvements to customer-facing technology for scheduling trips and fare payment among human service transportation providers. The CHSPTP also recommends adding technology to improve scheduling/dispatching, vehicle tracking, and responding to unforeseen changes in service needs. The CHSPTP recommends coordinating these efforts between transportation providers to avoid using different technology platforms.

RTA plans to conduct a procurement for a new paratransit scheduling and dispatching software contract in early 2025 for Runabout. The existing contract for paratransit scheduling and dispatch software is set to expire in 2025. The new agreement will allow RTA to implement the latest features in this technology.

This may include:

Automated Scheduling
Automated Ride Confirmations
Ride Status Updates
Real-Time Tracking
User Interface with drivers, dispatch, and users
Route Optimization
Reporting and Analytics
The number of software vendors in this field has increased significantly in recent years. The onboard hardware and technology are advanced, reliable and widely available. This has been able to improve the user experience as well as the expectations of the public.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G15
Ride-on recently contracted with Ecolane to implement improved scheduling software. Senior Go! scheduling and dispatching software is managed by the contractor – VTS. With RTA updating its paratransit scheduling and dispatching platform, the opportunity exists for human service transportation providers such as Ride-on and Senior Go! to piggyback with RTA to obtain and deploy the same technology or deploy new technology that can be coordinated with existing technology. A coordinated scheduling technology would enhance the ability of agencies to coordinate with one another in providing transportation across the different demand-responsive services available.

Travel Management Coordination Center
In 2015 Ride-On was awarded a Federal Transit Administration Mobility Services for All Americans (MSAA) Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) research grant to design a Travel Management Coordination Center (TMCC) for San Luis Obispo County. The TMCC would be a single information center with shared phones and a website meant to provide the most convenient access to information on transportation services in the region with direct access to trip reservations.

As part of the process, a TMCC advisory committee was created, which included RTA, The City of San Luis Obispo, and SLOCOG along with multiple other entities with a stake in regional transportation. The final report was issued in 2018. The report provided a comprehensive review of the administrative, operational, and technical design development of the San Luis Obispo County TMCC. The project deliverables included the concept of operations, system requirements, high-level system design, and a phased implementation plan.

The CHSPTP and the 2016 Short Range Transit Plans include a recommendation for creating a one-call center for regional transportation services. The CHSPTP terms it a One Call/One-Click Center. With advances in technology since 2018 and a resumption of services, since the COVID-19 pandemic has subsided, it is recommended that the efforts to form a TMCC resume during the SRTP planning period.

The 2018 TMCC Project report provides a good starting point, along with coordination between RTA and Ride-on to deploy the same paratransit reservation and dispatch software.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G
16 Attachment A

RTA AND SLO TRANSIT SCHEDULE COORDINATION

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G17
This page intentionally left blank.

SLO Transit Draft Plan 2024 – Appendix G LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.

SLO Transit Page G18
Center/Downtown Transfer Point
Weekdays During Academic Year
1A 1B 2A 2B 3A 3B 4A 4B 9 10 12
6:00 6:00
6:15 6:15 6:15 6:20 6:15
6:30 6:35 6:33 6:33 6:33
6:45 6:45 6:45 6:45 6:45 6:50
7:00 7:00 7:05 7:00 7:00 7:12
7:15 7:15 7:15 7:15 7:20 7:24 7:28
7:30 7:30 7:40 7:40 7:30 7:35 7:33 7:33 7:33
7:45 7:45 7:45 7:55 7:45 7:45
8:00 8:00 8:05 7:55 8:05 8:06
8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:15 8:20 8:24 8:28
8:30 8:30 8:40 8:40 8:30 8:33 8:33 8:33
8:45 8:45 8:45 8:50 8:45 8:50
9:00 9:00 9:05 8:55 9:00 9:05 9:06
9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:15 9:18 9:28
9:30 9:30 9:40 9:40 9:35 9:33 9:33 9:33
9:45 9:45 9:45 9:50 9:45 9:45 9:50
10:00 10:00 10:05 9:55 10:00 10:06
10:15 10:15 10:15 10:15 10:20 10:18 10:28
10:30 10:30 10:40 10:40 10:30 10:35 10:33 10:33 10:33
10:45 10:45 10:45 10:50 10:45 10:45
11:00 11:00 11:05 10:55 11:05 11:06
11:15 11:15 11:15 11:15 11:15 11:20 11:18 11:28
11:30 11:30 11:40 11:40 11:30 11:33 11:33 11:33
11:45 11:45 11:45 11:50 11:45 11:50
12:00 12:00 12:05 12:00 12:05 12:06
12:15 12:15 12:15 12:15 12:15 12:18 12:28
12:30 12:30 12:40 12:40 12:35 12:33 12:33 12:33
12:45 12:45 12:45 12:45 12:45 12:50
13:00 13:00 13:05 13:10 13:00 13:00 13:06
13:15 13:15 13:15 13:15 13:20 13:18 13:28
13:30 13:30 13:40 13:40 13:30 13:35 13:33 13:33 13:33
13:45 13:45 13:45 13:55 13:45
14:00 14:00 14:05 14:10 14:00 14:05 14:06
14:15 14:15 14:15 14:15 14:15 14:20 14:28
14:30 14:30 14:40 14:50 14:30 14:33 14:33 14:33
14:45 14:45 14:45 14:55 14:50
TABLE A-1: Example of Existing Schedule Coordination at Government 15-Minute
Period
SLO Transit Routes RTA Routes