ADOT On Call Transit Consulting Services

- 1 -

BACKGROUND OF FIRM

LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. has over forty years of firm experience and longevity, and provides consulting services in all phases of multimodal transportation planning, transit planning and operations, traffic engineering, parking analysis, traffic impact studies, access planning and design, and bicycle/pedestrian circulation. LSC specializes in transit planning for rural communities, as well as small to medium-sized urban areas. The firm is an employee-owned C Corporation incorporated in Colorado.

Originally established in 1977 as Leigh, Scott, and Cleary, Inc., the firm has offices in

Denver and Colorado Springs, Colorado, as well as Tahoe City, California. Each office is managed by a principal of the corporation. The firm’s strength lies in delivering a personal, innovative, and client-oriented approach that offers sensitivity to local needs, flexibility of approach based on these needs, and innovative perspective on solutions and service delivery. LSC brings:

Over 40 years of transit planning experience in small to medium sized cities and rural areas, as shown on the map to the right, with particular experience developing, evaluating, and analyzing transit systems.

Expertise completing hundreds of transit planning projects, and staff with a depth of experience in rural transit demand and financial analysis.

A reputation for quality plans that result in implementation, are completed on schedule, and have a high degree of flexibility to the client’s needs.

National transit leadership from a team whose subject matter experts are regularly called upon to participate in developing industry best practices, such as through the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) and the Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA).

o TCRP Report 154: Developing, Enhancing, and Sustaining Tribal Transit Services o TCRP Report 161: Methods for Forecasting Demand and Quantifying Need for Rural

Passenger Transportation A team that is optimal for a project of this scope and complexity – large enough to provide the staff and backup necessary to successfully complete the study on schedule and small enough to ensure that the project is given the highest priority within our firm.

FIRM EXPERIENCE

LSC has a long history of successfully working with clients through on-call contracts. Some of our current and former on-call clients include:

Colorado DOT Montana DOT

Wyoming DOT Sierra Vista MPO (AZ)

Central Yavapai MPO (AZ) City of DeKalb, IL

- 2 -

City of Billings, MT (MET Transit) Community Transit (WA) City of Rock Springs, WY (STAR

Transit) North Central Montana Transit

(Opportunity Link)

City of Colorado Springs, CO (Mountain Metro Transit)

Lassen County (CA)

In addition to our current and former on-call contracts, LSC also has a depth of recent experience in the specific areas of expertise listed under Discipline 1: Transit Planning Studies from the RFP as shown in Table 1.

RANGE OF SERVICES OFFERED

LSC has reviewed the categories of needed services and anticipated projects included in the RFP under Discipline 1: Transit Planning Studies. We have summarized our abilities in the following sections: Transit Feasibility Studies, Transit Service Implementation Plans, Transit Operations Planning Studies, Transit

Table 1: Transit Plan Projects

Project Transit Review

Service Alternatives

Financial Analysis

Community Engagement

Alpine County Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Atomic City Transit Short Range Transit Plan (NM) x x x x Amador County Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Aspen Short Range Transit Plan (CO) x x x x Calaveras Intercity Transit Study x x x x Del Norte County Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Eastern Nevada County Transit Development Plan x x x x Eastern Sierra Transit Authority Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Glenn Transit Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Humboldt County Transit Development Plan x x x x Lake County Transit Development Plan x x x x Lassen County Transit Development Plan x x x x City of Lodi Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Mendocino Transit Authority Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Merced County Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Park City/ Summit County Short Range Transit Plan (CO) x x x x Western Placer County Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Plumas County Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Redding Area Bus Authority Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Resort Triangle Transportation Plan (CA) x x x City of Rio Vista Short Range Transit Plan x x x x City of Roseville Short Range Transit Plan x x x x City of Anderson Short Range Transit Plan x x x x San Luis Obispo Joint RTA SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Santa Fe Multimodal Transition Plan (NM) x x x x Siskiyou Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Tehama County Transit Development Plan x x x x Truckee Microtransit Study x x x x Western El Dorado County Short and Long Range Transit Plan x x x x Western Nevada County Short Range Transit Plan x x x x Yosemite Area Regional Transit Service SRTP x x x x Yuba Sutter Short Range Transit Plan x x x x

Areas of Experience

- 3 -

Facility Planning; Transit Marketing Plans; Short Range Transit Plans; Regional Mobility and Coordination Planning; Ridership Surveys; Origins and Destination Study; Route Planning; System Efficiency Study;

Transit Feasibility Studies, Transit Service Implementation Plans, and Transit Operations Planning Studies LSC has vast experience analyzing and evaluating existing fixed-route and demand-response transit systems throughout the country (see Table 1), including an in-depth evaluation of existing services and performance measures, financial analysis, evaluation of passenger boarding and alighting data, analysis of origin-destination data, and alternatives analysis.

Evaluation of Existing Service and Performance Measures An important part of understanding any existing transit system is developing a deep understanding of the current routes and associated performance. LSC believes it is important to analyze the following: hours of operation and levels of service; passenger ridership data and performance metrics; trip origin-destination, patterns and purposes; existing fleet size, condition, and use; operational infrastructure (bus stops, hubs) usage and performance; and financials, including fares.

From this data, a route profile can be developed for each existing route that illustrates the route alignment, passenger characteristics, and performance measures. For each route, on-time performance, passengers per hour, cost per passenger, route connectivity, populations served, and primary origin-destination information can be analyzed and reported.

LSC has experience identifying high and low performing routes and flagging potential problems.

Performance measures should incorporate ridership, safety, financial, and service-level standards. The measures should have acceptable ranges, based on similar communities, goals, targets, and considerations for how to make adjustments when particular metrics fall below goals. LSC has a depth of experience developing these performance measures and creating systems that allow for easy ongoing management and updating. In Redding, CA we created route profiles for each of their routes to present the analysis of existing service, including route schedule, weekday boardings, and boarding per vehicle hour.

Origin-Destination Data LSC has extensive experience analyzing origin-destination data, from data provided by a client directly, gathered through an onboard survey, or collected through cell phone “big data”. Origin-destination patterns can be mapped by aggregating the points within defined zones in order to determine major travel patterns. In the City of Lodi, CA we analyzed existing ridership data for GrapeLine’s fixed-route service, for trips with origins or destinations along commuter route segments and made recommendations to increase frequency along their most popular route. In Lubbock, TX and Logan, UT we used “big data” from Streetlight Data to analyze how people were moving about the city as one part of our transit demand assessment in the restructuring of their transit system.

- 4 -

Financial Analysis and Cost Allocation LSC has experienced staff well-versed in developing cost allocation models for fixed-route and demand-responsive transit services. A cost allocation model provides base information by which current operations can be evaluated and is useful for estimating the cost ramification of any proposed service alternative. This cost allocation model will serve as a valuable tool for determining the cost of adding or reducing service levels under various transit service models.

Alternatives Analysis LSC staff pride themselves on being able to provide service alternatives that are solution-based for a community. Through data analysis, public and stakeholder input, and staff comment, alternatives are generated and analyzed to provide a thorough picture of cost, potential passenger ridership, and operational outcomes. Existing route realignment, service expansion, and schedule changes are all explored in addition to potential new services.

Most recently, LSC has also begun to consider other service alternatives that offer communities flexible options that complement traditional fixed-route systems and help address diverse mobility needs. These alternatives—such as microtransit, demand-responsive shuttles, vanpools, and special event services— can fill service gaps, especially in low-density or underserved areas where conventional transit may be less viable.

General Transit Service Planning As communities experience change in growth, employment patterns, and population aging;

transportation needs and travel patterns change, and public transportation services must adjust to meet those needs. LSC has extensive experience with transit service planning that is developed and tailored to meet the specific needs of the community in the near term and the long term. Potential service design can range from modest to significant route realignment, to alternative service delivery models.

Nonetheless, LSC approaches transit service planning with no preconceptions and with a “fresh approach” to how a transit service may be operated.

As part of a collaborative planning process, any potential approaches will be carefully evaluated and analyzed with staff, key stakeholders, and the community at public workshops. Each of the potential service designs will also be analyzed for their potential impact on the various demand-responsive services provided throughout the service area. From these designs will come estimates of ridership and revenues, operating costs, and capital requirements, all done at the sketch planning level sufficient for comparison and evaluation of the alternatives with each other and selection of the best approaches.

Transit service delivery options can include, but are not limited to:

• Integrated Fixed-Route and Demand-Responsive Transit

Services: These include service delivery options that build off of existing fixed-route services and may be modified to include demand-responsive segments, as well as the potential use of feeder services that may use subsidized taxi, microtransit or rides to connect riders in less dense areas with the nearest fixed-route service. In addition, flex route and route deviation options can also be an effective and efficient option in some communities.

• Commuter Bus Service/Park-and-Ride Locations and Services: Certain travel patterns may be well suited to be “intercepted” and consolidated at peripheral park-and-ride lots.

- 5 -

• Transportation Network Company (TNC) Integration: Another version of a feeder service may be to utilize TNCs (such as Uber and Lyft) to provide subsidized TNC rides to connect riders in less dense areas with the nearest fixed-route service. On certain corridors the ability to use TNC services in larger vehicles, such as UberPool and LyftLine, could be examined and analyzed.

• Microtransit Service: Technology-enabled on-demand microtransit service may be an option to consider for areas not well-suited to traditional fixed-route transit service. Our recommendations for microtransit are being implemented by Lodi’s GrapeLine service.

• Non-Traditional Transit Options: The last few years have seen significant advances in the world of transportation including electric micro-mobility options such as e-scooters and e-bike bikeshare, early testing and trials of autonomous vehicles, technology-enabled carshare and vanshare, battery electric buses with fast charging capabilities, and smart roadway and infrastructure that interfaces with vehicles on the road and communicates information to drivers in real-time.

LSC believes it is important to evaluate all service alternatives against strategic questions about tradeoffs and considerations including:

• What is the overall service philosophy: geographic coverage system, high-frequency intensive system, school/university focused, lifeline system for the transit-dependent, or commuter-focused?

• What are the efficiency tradeoffs in terms of ridership, costs, and travel times?

• What is the estimated relative performance of corridors in areas of ridership demand, costs, and safety?

LSC has experience developing detailed transit service operating plans, including the following:

• Service Plan and Long-Term Development: LSC regularly develops complete service and operation plans for service alternatives, including the type and level of service, operational costs, route maps, schedules, service times, bus stop locations, fare structures, and other operating aspects. The service plan can also look five to ten years into the future to accommodate long-term service development.

• Title VI Plan: With any major service change, especially reduction of service, impacts to low income and minority populations must be considered under Title VI of the Civil Acts Right of 1964. The intent is to ensure that a disparate impact to low income and minority populations, thus favoring other populations, does not occur. LSC has experience working with transit agencies to ensure compliance.

• Financial Plan: LSC’s five-year financial plan is based upon the type and level of services indicated in the preferred service plan and is developed using constant dollars and then adjusted for anticipated inflation and possible changes in funding. The financial plan can also include a phased approach to service development, based on priority and funding availability. This approach was used recently for transit systems in San Luis Obispo County.

• Capital Needs Planning and Procurement: Our capital planning process determines the necessary fleet (number, size, type, propulsion, and mix), facility needs, park-and-ride opportunities, and bus stop improvements. Capital costs for the next five to ten years are estimated for all infrastructure improvements and vehicle purchase or lease. We identify potential funding sources, including local, state, and federal funding, along with other grant opportunities.

Regional Mobility and Coordination Planning LSC has completed hundreds of coordination studies and has expertise in reviewing existing coordination and integration efforts, as well as identifying service duplications with an eye towards minimizing or eliminating inefficient service delivery. We have completed Coordinated Transportation Plans in various California Counties as well as Yuma County in Arizona.

- 6 -

Onboard and Online Passenger Surveying LSC has used online community surveys for a variety of purposes including gauging public perceptions of current and future transportation needs, gaps, and demand, as well as gaining an understanding of the public’s thoughts and opinions of existing services, potential service options, and funding alternatives. To accommodate all residents, the survey questionnaire can be made available through online and paper versions, as well as in English and Spanish. An online community survey is extremely beneficial as it allows users to access the questionnaire at their convenience. We have found through our outreach efforts on several recent transit studies that participation rates among the community are much higher for online opportunities than for traditional public meetings. In Logan, Utah, we conducted community meetings at three central locations and used a community survey as a public input opportunity. The online survey and community meetings were publicized through the transit system website, social media, community organizations, printed flyers, and by the university. We received over 3,000 responses to the online survey while attendance at the community meetings was low.

An onboard passenger survey is the best means of engaging existing transit riders in a planning process.

Many passengers are willing to complete a survey questionnaire during their bus trip and provide comments, while the number of passengers who typically attend any type of meeting is much lower. The trip origins and destinations and the level of satisfaction with existing services provide insight into the most appropriate transportation services that will maximize system utilization and operational efficiency. In addition, we understand the importance of having a bilingual questionnaire (English and Spanish) to accommodate all passengers. Each survey is tailored based on discussions with project staff and any advisory groups, as well as from our team’s long experience with constructing onboard survey instruments. LSC led an onboard passenger survey and analysis in Grand Junction, CO that covered 11 fixed routes leaving from three separate transit centers.