18 th National Conference on Rural Public & Intercity Bus Transportation Conference
description
Transcript of 18 th National Conference on Rural Public & Intercity Bus Transportation Conference
1
1818thth National Conference on National Conference on Rural Public Rural Public
& & Intercity Bus Transportation Intercity Bus Transportation
ConferenceConference
Kimberly GayleKimberly GayleOffice of Federal Transit Grants ProgramsOffice of Federal Transit Grants Programs
Division of Mass TransportationDivision of Mass Transportation
October 20, 2008
California Rural Intercity Bus Study: California Rural Intercity Bus Study: Results, Solutions and AccomplishmentsResults, Solutions and Accomplishments
2
Study PurposeStudy Purpose
MissioMission & n & VisionVision
To Improve To Improve
Mobility Mobility
Across Across
California California
Provide an in depth analysis and objective evaluation of the intercity bus network that currently exists
Provide findings and recommendations
Promote partnerships & encourage cross-jurisdictional coordination
3
Findings & Findings & RecommendationsRecommendations
Lack of Intercity-Character Services
Lack of Intercity Character-Capital Projects
Issue RecommendationProvide definitions that
would help applicants and evaluators determine which projects have an intercity focusNarrow the program definition of eligible projects to be specifically used on rural intercity services – with a focus on meaningful connections
4
Findings & Findings & RecommendationsRecommendations
Underserved Areas/Routes
Despite Coverage, Intercity Service is not a Network
Issue RecommendationContract for service,
meeting identified needs, filling gaps in the network
Multi-year fundingFund trip-planning systems and other informational sources
Using a pro-active approach, shift all carriers to public intermodal terminals
5
Findings & Findings & RecommendationsRecommendations
State Program Network Information Initiative
No common source for customer to gain information
Connectivity often difficult
Formulate a single informational source to “tie” network together
Issue Recommendation
6
Findings & Findings & RecommendationsRecommendations
Intermodal Terminals
No common location(s)
Connectivity often difficult
Issue Recommendation
Develop policy that:
Favoring the development of intermodal terminals that include all intercity operators
Publicly-funded facilities should be comprehensive transportation centers
7
California Intercity Bus California Intercity Bus Program State Emphasis Program State Emphasis
AreasAreas
Provide a meaningful connection. Connectivity to other modes of
transportation with meaningful connection
Meet broader transportation needs Informational Outreach Fulfilling gaps in service with a planning and/or
feasibility studies
8
Intercity Bus Service Intercity Bus Service DefinitionDefinition
Regularly scheduled bus service, available to the general public, operating on fixed routes to more distant points:
Making limited stops Connecting two or more urban areas not in
close proximity Capacity for transportation baggage Provide meaningful connections and
reasonable lay-over times
9
Meaningful ConnectionMeaningful Connection
Allows for connectivity (transfers both outbound and inbound) at a designated physical location (transit gateway) serviced by intercity bus carriers, either directly or on the street immediately adjacent to the facility.
10
Meaningful ConnectionMeaningful Connection
Transit Gateway: Physical location where one or more modes of transportation meet with supporting services (i.e. ability to purchase tickets, restrooms, food/drink venders) for customers/passengers to make trips safely and as seamless as possible.
11
California Intercity
Bus Network
California Intercity Bus
Network
National Bus Network
California Network
Identified Gaps in Service
US and Regional Roads
12
13
Discretionary Project Discretionary Project TimelineTimeline
Apr 2008 Aug 2008
May Jun Jul Aug
Technical Assistance WorkshopsMay - June
CalACT WorkshopApril 22
Evaluation Period
CommitteeSeptember -
October
Award Announcement
November
Application Submittal PeriodJuly 1 – August 29
Aug 2008 Nov 2008
Sep Oct Nov
14
Project Categories Project Categories SummarySummary
PROJECT TYPE CATEGORYAPPLICATION
TITLE
FEDERAL SHARE
(Percentage)
PROJECT PERIOD (Months)
MAXIMUM AWARD LIMIT
Operating Assistance 1 Operations 55.33% 12 $300,000
2 Bus Purchase/ 88.53% 24 $300,000
Bus Related
Equipment88.53% 12 $100,000
3Transit
Infrastructure88.53% 15 $200,000
4
Planning &
Marketing
Studies
88.53% 15 $100,000
Capital Assistance
15
Evaluation & ScoringEvaluation & Scoring
Technical Assessment Program requirements Meeting program definition, and
national objectives
Committee Evaluation Application based on merit Projects “Ready to Go” Points for emphasis areas
16
THANK YOU!THANK YOU!
17
CONTACT CONTACT INFORMATIONINFORMATION
Dan MundyDan MundyBranch Chief
Rural Transit & Procurement
(916) [email protected]
ov
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/MassTrans/http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/MassTrans/5311.html5311.html
Fred LenhartFred LenhartAssociate Planner
(916) [email protected]
Ronaldo HuRonaldo HuTransportation Planner
(916) [email protected]
18
QUESTIONS?QUESTIONS?