UN UND S D SHUTTLE TTLE-CAT M MER ERGER ER FEA EASIB IBIL - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

GRAND FORKS/EAST GRAND FORKS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

UN UND S D SHUTTLE TTLE-CAT M MER ERGER ER FEA EASIB IBIL ILIT ITY

CAT AND UND WORKSHOP #2 – July 18, 2019

• Introductions
• Decision-making:

– University Needs – City Needs

• Discuss Decision-making Timeline:

– Buses – Service Planning – Employees

• Review of the Cost Numbers:
• Pros and Cons (University Perspective)
• Wrap-up

Wor

• rksh

shop A

• p Agenda

genda

Study tudy S Steps teps

Unive University N sity Needs

• Cost:
• Coverage:
• Service Hours: 7 AM to 10 PM
• Service Days: Monday-Friday
• Only Pay for In-session Periods
• Service Frequency:

– 15 Minute Bi-directional on University – 20 Minute to Medical/Arena – 30 Minute Night Service

City N ity Needs

• Cost: Do Not Raise Property Tax Amount

UND: Pay Local New Capital Match

• Support Equitable Share of Operating
• Service Hours: 6:00 AM to 10 PM
• Ability to Count Ridership
• Do not Extend Paratransit Area

Decision ecision-Making king

• Lower
• Middle
• Upper

Shuttle Stop Activity Tiers

Key ey S Shut uttle tle Stops tops

Decision ecision-ma making king – Pros/

• s/Cons F
• ns From
• m Univ

Univer ersity sity P Per erspectiv spective

Greater level and consistency of driver training with CAT (Enhanced Student Safety) Operating cost is greater (in most years). More appropriate vehicle. Capital cost is not directly integrated into overall

• perating cost.

Less time spent addressing complaints Less control over decisions (special services, etc.). Year-to-Year (Quarter-to-Quarter) cost stability. Still have some university-based transit costs. Reduced university staff administrative time More opportunity for cost control while maintaining level of service. Better integration of transit service between campus and Grand Forks Service likely operates during worse inclement weather Reduced maintenance staff demand

Pros Cons

Cost C

• st Compa
• mparison

ison – 5-Years F s Futur uture

Year CAT O Operated ed UND O Operated Annu nnual In Increase Estimated ed Allocation Model Operatin ing Co Cost1 UND A Allo llocated Operatin ing Co Cost2 Annu nnual In Increase3 Ope perating Co Costs by Variable Rent nt Amou mount4 Low Middle Uppe pper 2020 0.0% $456,500 $361,800 0.0% $315,800 $361,800 $402,400 2021 2.7% $468,800 Future Amounts Will Require Evaluation/ Negotiation After First Year

• f Operation

3.3% $326,200 $373,700 $415,700 2022 2.7% $481,500 3.3% $337,000 $386,000 $429,400 2023 2.7% $494,500 3.3% $348,100 $398,700 $443,600 2024 2.7% $507,900 3.3% $359,600 $411,900 $458,200 2025 2.7% $521,600 3.3% $371,500 $425,500 $473,300

Notes 1 - 2020 Operating Cost reflects amount assigned to UND through the CAT Cost Allocation Model 2 - Assumes the agreed to $94,700 is subtracted from the Estimated Allocation Model Operating Cost for 2020. Future reallocation will depend on updated UND service allocation and city financial capacity to support 3 - Annual percent change reflects average change from estimated trend line of 2013-2019 bus rent. 4 - 2019 costs based on recalculating total based on using trend average, one standard deviation lower and one standard deviation higher rates.

Veh ehicle icle Costs

• sts (July

uly 2019) 2019) New ew Fly Flyer er

Item em Ite Item C Cost st Veh ehicle e Co Cost Specified Model Bus $478,000 Syncromatics AVL $16,700 Farebox $16,200 Wrap $2,000 $512,900

Local Match – 20% of Vehicle Cost: $103,000 Each Vehicle

• Campus Master Plan:

– Any changes that impact routes? – Any changes that activity impact flow patterns?

• If Changes, Address in

Route Concept Planning:

– Role of Campus Road – Feasibility of “Loops”

The F e Futur uture e of

• f Campus

mpus

• Campus Master Plan:

– Any changes that impact routes? – Any changes that activity impact flow patterns?

• If Changes, Address in

Route Concept Planning:

– Role of Campus Road – Feasibility of “Loops”

The F e Futur uture e of

• f Campus

mpus

• Campus Master Plan:

– Any changes that impact routes? – Any changes that activity impact flow patterns?

• If Changes, Address in

Route Concept Planning:

– Role of Campus Road – Feasibility of “Loops”

The F e Futur uture e of

• f Campus

mpus

• Fares – Currently Fare Free:

– Retain? – Change? – Faculty/Staff – Fare Policy for CAT Use?

• Students Fare Free – Student Fees Pay $0.75/Trip (Billed by CAT)
• In Future – Better Integrate CAT Routes and Shuttle Routes?

Outsta Outstanding D nding Discus iscussion/ sion/Decision ecision Items tems

• List Action Items:

– IS there anything else needed as input to decision-making?

• Public Meetings:

– Schedule

• Set Final Workshop:

– Is one needed?

Wr Wrap-Up Up