Board of Directors Information Summary

Transcription

1 Regional Public Transportation Authority 302 N. First Avenue, Suite 700, Phoenix, Arizona , Fax Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item #6 Date July 11, 2008 Subject Regional Office Center (ROC) Update Summary On June 23, 2008, the Regional Office Center Working Group met to discuss the two existing buildings being considered for purchase to co-locate the agencies. In addition, the group explored a revised and re-scoped plan for a new ROC building. Following the Executive Session, the Working Group voted to pursue the 210 East Earll building and continue negotiations for the purchase of that building. Also following the Executive Session, the Working Group voted to ask the Board of Directors of MAG, Valley Metro RPTA, Valley METRO Rail, and the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association (AMWUA) to consider the purchase of the 210 East Earll building. The other two options were removed from consideration. A meeting of the ROC Task Force has been set for July 28 at which time the representatives of each organization will report the decision reached by their organization. Those four decisions will be used to determine whether to continue negotiations for the purchase of the 210 E. Earll building. Having the four organizations, MAG, Valley Metro RPTA, Valley METRO Rail, and the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association (AMWUA), in the same office complex is thought to be financially advantageous and constructive since the groups all work together closely, and have similar interests and constituents. On June 18, the two existing buildings being considered at that time, 111 West Monroe and 210 East Earll, were toured after the MAG consultant, Parsons/3DI, had conducted inspections and assessments of the buildings. The 210 East Earll building, also referred to as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Building, is located outside the downtown Phoenix redevelopment area on Third Street at Earll. It is approximately three blocks from the Thomas Light Rail station and two blocks from the Park Central Mall shopping and restaurant area. Originally constructed in 1992, the six-story, 158,249 gross square foot commercial office building includes a 1

2 199,936 gross square foot garage accommodating approximately 655 spaces. There have been no significant renovations since this building was constructed. Consultant replacement recommendations in the initial five years are replacement of roof coverings because the warranty expires in 2012, cooling towers, air handling units and air distribution infrastructure, parking garage lighting fixtures, interior lighting fixtures and circuits, concrete roadway at loading dock apron, core area wall, floor, and ceiling finishes, and exit and emergency lighting systems with battery powered fixtures. Further financial and other details about these buildings were restricted to a confidential memo distributed to those who attended an executive session. If the Board desires such information on the 210 E. Earll building, it is appropriate that the Board enter into Executive Session as allowed under ARS Section A.3 and A.7 to discuss negotiations for the purchase of real property. Fiscal Impact At this point, when a final cost is negotiated for the purchase price of the building and the agencies involved in the purchase are finalized, this item will be brought back to the Board for a decision. The fiscal impact including the actual lease to purchase costs will be discussed at that time or in Executive Session. Considerations Following the late July ROC Working Group meeting, an updated report will be provided. Recommendations It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve further exploration and consideration of the 210 East Earll building as a possible site for a Regional Office Center (ROC) with MAG, METRO, and AMWUA. Contact Person Christopher F. Curcio Deputy Executive Director of Finance (602) Attachments None 2

3 Transit Performance Report FY (JUNE 30, 2007) J ANUARY 2008

4 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) Transit Performance Report I SSUED: JANUARY 2008 The Transit Performance Report (TPR) is prepared and updated annually by Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA). This report is developed using input from, and reviewed by, member agencies and the RPTA Board. The TPR serves as input to Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) updates. In 2006 RPTA hired a consultant to conduct a Service Efficiency and Effectiveness Study (SEES). One task of this study was to develop a series of performance measures. Transit service in the region is made possible and supported by many funding sources including local city taxes in many cases. The SEES performance measures support the auditing requirements of Proposition 400 legislation. Proposition 400 authorizes a half-cent sales tax approved by voters in 2004 that goes toward freeway, street, transit and light rail improvements. In addition, the SEES developed initial performance targets that will allow comparison between performance expectations and actual performance. These performance measures and performance targets have been incorporated into the TPR. In future years these targets will be reviewed, refined and indexed to inflation as appropriate. The 2007 TPR continues to transition between the previous Performance Management Analysis System (PMAS) format and the new TPR and is based on the findings from the SEES and the data available at the time. In the future, the TPR will serve as a report card indicating the performance of each mode and service category at the system and route level as defined in the SEES. Modes covered by future TPRs will include fi xed route, paratransit, vanpool, and light rail. This report reflects data as reported to RPTA by member agencies. In fiscal year (July 1, 2006 to June 30, 2007), there were many changes affecting data collection and reporting. Some of these changes include service providers transitioning to new fareboxes and light rail construction along major transit routes. Also as part of transitioning towards a new TPR, data definitions and measurements have changed from previous reporting years. Table of Contents DEFINITIONS... 3 FIXED ROUTE BUS... 4 PARATRANSIT... 8 VANPOOL SYSTEM SUMMARY

5 Definitions Average Fare: Average fare is the average price a person pays for a transit trip. It is equal to total fare revenue collected divided by total boardings. Boarding: A boarding is known as an unlinked passenger trip. Every time a person boards a vehicle it is counted as a boarding. For example, if a person makes a trip involving one transfer, this trip is counted as two boardings. Consumer Price Index (CPI): This index is used to measure changes in prices from one period to another. The CPI is frequently used to adjust base payments to reflect changes in prices. In this Report, the CPI for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) which is averaged for all U.S. Cities, not adjusted for seasonal changes, for transportation items with a base period of =100 was used. The average annual index for FY and FY were calculated using the average monthly index from each fiscal year. The change from the average FY index to FY index is 0.79 percent. Farebox Recovery Ratio: This is the percentage of total operating cost that is covered by fares collected. It is equal to total fare revenue collected divided by total operating costs. Mechanical Failures: Mechanical failure is a failure of some mechanical element of the revenue vehicle that prevents the vehicle from completing a scheduled revenue trip or from starting the next scheduled revenue trip. In addition, mechanical failures include failures from mechanical element of the revenue vehicle, because of local agency policy, prevents the vehicle from completing a scheduled revenue trip or starting the next revenue trip even though the vehicle is physically able to continue in revenue service. Net Vanpool Starts: Calculated by subtracting number of deleted vanpools from the number of new vanpools started. Operating Cost: The total cost to operate and maintain a transit system including labor, fuel, and maintenance, 3 and administration. TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) Revenue Hour: A revenue hour is an hour that one vehicle in revenue service is available to pick up revenue passengers. If ten vehicles are in service for two hours each, they collectively perform twenty revenue hours of service. Revenue Mile: A revenue mile is a mile traveled by one vehicle in revenue service that is available to pick up revenue passengers. If ten vehicles are in service for two miles each, they collectively perform twenty revenue miles of service. Revenue Service: Revenue service occurs when a vehicle is available to the general public and there is an expectation of carrying passengers who pay the required fare. Vehicles operated in fare-free service are also considered in revenue service. Revenue service includes layover/ recovery time, but does not include deadhead (i.e. travel from garage to the start point of a route), or vehicle maintenance testing. Safety Incident: Safety incidents only include major safety incidents that involve a transit vehicle or occur on transit-controlled property. Some conditions that apply to a major indecent involve property damage equal or exceeding $25,000, fatality or major injuries for two or more people. Security Incident: Security incidents are crimes (e.g. injuries or deaths resulting from assaults, arson, homicide) and the consequences of security incidents. Security incidents only include major incidents which involve a fatality, two or more injures or property damage over $25,000. Subsidy per Boarding: Also known as net operating cost per boarding, this is the operating cost per boarding minus the fare revenue per boarding. This number indicates the amount of public funding that is used to make up the difference between the cost of providing transportation service and the revenue generated by this service on a per boarding basis.

6 FIXED ROUTE BUS (SYSTEM-WIDE) Includes local, Express/BRT, shuttle/circulator and rural routes.

7 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) FIXED ROUTE BUS (SYSTEM-WIDE) The service categories and modes being measured in this interim report, and their accompanying criteria, are as follows: Subject Target Source of Target COST EFFICIENCY/EFFECTIVENESS Farebox Recovery Ratio 25% Regional Fare Policy recommendation approved by Board on September 20, Operating Cost per Boarding $2.34 Baseline from FY05-06 Fixed Route average* Subsidy per Boarding $1.76 Baseline from FY05-06 Fixed Route average* Operating Cost per Revenue Mile $5.00 Baseline from FY05-06 Fixed Route average* Average Fare $0.68 Five year timeframe starting in FY08* SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS Annual Increase in Total Boardings 3% Service Efficiency and Effectiveness Study - Board approved Annual Increase in Boardings, Weekday, Saturday, Sunday 3% Service Efficiency and Effectiveness Study - Board approved Avg. Boardings per Revenue Mile 2.1 Baseline from FY05-06 Fixed Route average* Detailed data supporting the charts on the following pages is available from the RPTA upon request. *Infl ated based on Consumer Price Index (CPI). 5

8 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) FIXED ROUTE BUS PERFORMANCE RESULTS (SYSTEM-WIDE) COST EFFICIENCY/EFFECTIVENESS Farebox Recovery Ratio Operating Cost per Boarding Target $ % 23.67% 24.24% Target 25% $2.23 $2.29 $2.62 The percentage of operating cost covered by fare revenue increased slightly from FY Fare revenue increased faster than operating cost in part because newer service continues to mature and schedules and routes were adjusted. Operating cost increased while boardings decreased slightly. Rising fuel costs and labor contributed to the increase in operating cost. Subsidy per Boarding Operating Cost per Revenue Mile $1.65 $1.75 $1.99 Target $1.76 $6.00 $4.71 $4.90 $5.28 Target $5.00 The net operating cost per boarding increased from last year and exceeds the target. Operating cost per revenue mile increased from last year and exceeds the target. Average Fare Target $0.68 $0.58 $0.54 $0.64 * FY 2005 was the last full year operated without the benefit of Proposition 400 funds. Fare revenue increased by $0.10 per boarding but fell slightly short of the target. 6

9 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) FIXED ROUTE BUS PERFORMANCE RESULTS (SYSTEM-WIDE) SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS Total Fixed Route Boardings (Includes shuttles/circulators) 59,070,596 Annual Increase/Decrease in Total Boardings Annual Increase/Decrease in Weekday Boardings 58,858,166 58,184,595 Target 3% Target 3% This includes local, express/brt, shuttle/circulator, and rural routes % Boardings decreased slightly from FY % The previous report measured total weekday boardings. Boardings on a typical weekday decreased slightly from the previous year. Annual Increase/Decrease in Saturday Boardings Annual Increase/Decrease in Sunday Boardings Boardings per Revenue Mile Target 2.1 Target 3% Target 3% -2.66% The previous report measured total Saturday boardings. Boardings on a typical Saturday decreased from the previous year % The previous report measured total Sunday boardings. Boardings on a typical Sunday decreased slightly from the previous year. Boardings per Revenue Mile decreased slightly. * FY 2005 was the last full year operated without the benefit of Proposition 400 funds. 7

10 PARATRANSIT

11 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) PARATRANSIT The service categories and modes being measured in this interim report, and their accompanying criteria, are as follows: Subject Target Source of Target COST EFFICIENCY/EFFECTIVENESS Farebox Recovery Ratio 5% Baseline from FY05-06 Dial-a-Ride system average* Operating Cost per Boarding $28.78 Baseline from FY05-06 Dial-a-Ride system average* Subsidy per Boarding $27.37 Baseline from FY05-06 Dial-a-Ride system average* Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $50.70 Baseline from FY05-06 Dial-a-Ride system average* SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS Annual Increase in Total Boardings 3% Service Efficiency and Effectiveness Study Boardings per Revenue Hour 1.76 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS Dial-a-Ride system average* ADA On-time Performance 90% Service Efficiency and Effectiveness Study Detailed data supporting the charts on the following pages is available from the RPTA upon request. *Infl ated based on Consumer Price Index (CPI). 9

12 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) PARATRANSIT PERFORMANCE RESULTS COST EFFICIENCY/EFFECTIVENESS Farebox Recovery Ratio 4.81% Target 4.41% Operating Cost per Boarding $31.97 Target $28.78 This ratio decreased slightly from the previous year and still is below the target. Operating costs increased while boardings decreased. Subsidy per Boarding Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $30.56 Target $27.37 $55.46 Target $50.70 The net operating cost to transport each passenger increased from the previous year. The operating cost per revenue hour increased slightly from the previous year and was above the target. * FY 2005 was the last full year operated without the benefi t of Proposition 400 funds. 10

13 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) PARATRANSIT PERFORMANCE RESULTS SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS Annual Increase/Decrease in Total Boardings Boardings per Revenue Hour 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 1.73 Target % -1% -1.71% -2% Boardings per revenue hour decreased slightly and was slightly below the target Total boardings decreased by almost two percent. ADA On-Time Performance 93.5% 89.8% 95.39% The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is federal law which prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities in many areas, including public transportation. On-time performance measures how many ADA boardings occurred within 30 minutes of the pick-up time given to the passenger at the time of their reservation. Performance exceeded the target by over 5 percent. * FY 2005 was the last full year operated without the benefi t of Proposition 400 funds. 11

14 VANPOOL

15 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) VANPOOL The service categories and modes being measured in this interim report, and their accompanying criteria, are as follows: Subject Target Source of Target COST EFFICIENCY/EFFECTIVENESS Farebox Recovery Ratio 100% Baseline from fiscal year PMAS Vanpool average* Operating Cost per Boarding $1.71 Baseline from fiscal year PMAS Vanpool average* Subsidy per Boarding $0 Baseline from fiscal year PMAS Vanpool average* Operating Cost per Revenue Mile $0.46 Baseline from fiscal year PMAS Vanpool average* Average Fare $1.85 Baseline from fiscal year PMAS Vanpool average* SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS Boardings per Revenue Mile.27 Baseline from fiscal year PMAS Vanpool average* Annual Increase in Total Boardings 0% Baseline from fiscal year PMAS Vanpool average* Number of new Vanpools started Regional Transportation Plan Detailed data supporting the charts on the following pages is available from the RPTA upon request. *Infl ated based on Consumer Price Index (CPI). 13

16 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REPORT FY (JUNE 30, 2007) VANPOOL PERFORMANCE RESULTS COST EFFICIENCY/EFFECTIVENESS Farebox Recovery Ratio Operating Cost per Boarding % % % 115% $1.72 $1.70 $1.68 $1.70 Target $ % $ % % % % % $1.64 $1.62 $1.60 $1.66 $ % % Target 100% $1.58 Farebox recovery ratio increased from the previous year. That is, fare revenue exceeded operating cost at a greater percentage. Operating cost per boarding decreased compared to last reporting year and is below the target. Subsidy per Boarding Operating Cost per Revenue Mile $0.30 $0.20 $0.10 $0.00 Target $0.00 -$0.10 -$0.20 -$ $0.44 $0.46 $0.44 Target $0.46 Subsidy per boarding continues to decrease. This means that fare revenue exceeded operating cost. Operating cost per revenue mile decreased from the previous year and was below the target. Total Vanpool Boardings Net Vanpool Starts 1.5 million 1,418, million 1.3 million 1,270, million 1.1 million 1,025, million Vanpool boardings continued to increase Target 24 Fewer vanpools started than in the previous year and didn t make the target number. In FY 2006, a Start a vanpool and get one month free promotion was held. * FY 2005 was the last full year operated without the benefi t of Proposition 400 funds. 14

17 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE P REPORT R RT FY (JUNE J 30, 2007) SYSTEM SUMMARY Performance Indicator Fixed Route Paratransit Vanpool System Total Farebox Recovery 24.24% 4.41% 115% 22.20% Operating Cost per Boarding $2.62 $31.97 $1.63 $3.05 Subsidy per Boarding $1.998 $ $0.24 $2.37 Operating Cost per Revenue Mile $5.28 $0.44 $5.40 Average Fare $0.64 $1.41 $1.87 $0.68 Total Boardings 58,184, ,790 1,418,466 60,525,851 Boardings per Revenue Mile For questions or detailed data supporting this document, please call (602) and request the Transit Performance Report Support data. 15

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38 PRELIMINARY DRAFT Efficiency and Effectiveness Performance Measures Targets--Board Approved June 2007 FIXED ROUTE BUS, SYSTEMWIDE TARGET ASSUMPTIONS Cost Efficiency/Effectiveness Farebox Recovery Ratio 25% Regional Fare Policy recommendation to Board Operating Cost per Boarding $2.32 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average Subsidy (Net Opg Cost) per Boarding $1.75 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average Cost per Revenue Mile $4.96 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average Average Fare $0.67 Five year timeframe starting in FY08 Service Effectiveness Total Boardings 3%* Matches 3% CPI increase; Subject to service increases Boardings Avg. Weekday, Sat., Sun. 3%* Matches 3% CPI increase; Subject to service increases Boardings per Revenue Mile 2.1 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average Safety Incidents per 100,000 Vehicle Miles 1.2 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average Security Incidents per "x" Boardings 0 Ultimate goal, 0 was achieved by RPTA Veolia for entire 2006 Complaints per "x" Boardings 28 Low end of current RPTA "C" range; meets Phoenix current complaints On-time Performance 90% Meets both RPTA and Phoenix current performance Miles between Mechanical Failures 23,400 Baseline from CY06 RPTA data (weighted average across fleets). Phoenix OK with target. Need to move to Miles between Mechanical Failures over time with next contract negotiations. Number will go down some, bcs there are more Mech. Failures than Roadcalls. Customer Satisfaction 89% Customer satisfaction index based on March survey - Combination of "very satisfied" and "somewhat satisfied" with overall service FIXED ROUTE BUS, ROUTE LEVEL TARGET ASSUMPTIONS Cost Efficiency/Effectiveness Farebox Recovery Ratio 25% Regional Fare Policy recommendation to Board Operating Cost per Boarding $2.32 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average Subsidy (Net Opg Cost) per Boarding $1.75 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average Cost per Revenue Mile $4.96 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average Service Effectiveness Total Boardings 3%* Matches 3% CPI increase; Subject to service increases Boardings Avg. Weekday, Sat., Sun. 3%* Matches 3% CPI increase; Subject to service increases Boardings per Revenue Mile 2.1 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS FR average; peer average Boardings per Revenue Hour (Express Bus) TBD Challenge: Phoenix does not currently break out this data. On-time Performance 90% Meets both RPTA and Phoenix current performance Miles between Mechanical Failures 23,400 Baseline from CY06 RPTA data (weighted average across fleets). Need to move to Miles between Mechanical Failures over time with next contract negotiations. Number will go down some, bcs there are more Mech. Failures than Roadcalls. PARATRANSIT TARGET ASSUMPTIONS Cost Efficiency/Effectiveness Farebox Recovery Ratio 5% Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS DAR system average Operating Cost per Boarding $28.55 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS DAR system average Subsidy (Net Opg Cost) per Boarding $27.16 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS DAR system average Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $50.30 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS DAR system average Average Fare TBD No goal currently. Set by each agency Service Effectiveness Total Boardings 3%* Matches 3% CPI increase; Subject to service increases Boardings Avg. Weekday, Sat., Sun. 3%* Matches 3% CPI increase; Subject to service increases Boardings per Revenue Hour 1.76 Baseline from FY05-06 PMAS DAR system average; close to low of peers Percent No Shows 5% Phoenix does not have a target for "no shows", but has seen 5.3% from July-Dec Paratransit consultant/rpta recommended 5%. The Glendale target is 10%. On-time Performance 90% Glendale target. Phoenix's performance standard is also 90% or above Miles between Mechanical Failures TBD Set by each agency (Phoenix tracks miles per 100,000 service miles) Customer Satisfaction 90% Glendale and Phoenix (Satisfied and Very Satisfied; every 2-5 yrs).

39 PRELIMINARY DRAFT RAIL TARGET ASSUMPTIONS Cost Efficiency/Effectiveness Farebox Recovery Ratio 25% Regional Fare Policy recommendation to Board Operating Cost per Boarding TBD To be provided in Spring, 2008 as part of VMR Budget process Subsidy (Net Opg Cost) per Boarding TBD To be provided in Spring, 2008 as part of VMR Budget process Cost per Revenue Mile TBD To be provided in Spring, 2008 as part of VMR Budget process Average Fare TBD To be provided in Spring, 2008 as part of VMR Budget process Service Effectiveness Total Boardings 7,827,000 FY 2010 Based on FTA formula for annualizing Avg. Weekday Boardings Boardings Avg. Weekday 26,090 Based on FFGA New Starts Boardings Avg. Sat. N/A Not available Boardings Avg. Weekday Sun./Holiday N/A Not available Boardings per Vehicle Revenue Mile 3.94 Rail. Based on 2,184,000 car miles in 2010 (Financial Plan). Boardings per Revenue Mile 8.04 Rail. Based on 1,071,000 car miles in 2010 (Financial Plan). Safety Incidents per 100,000 Vehicle Miles N/A To be provided in Spring, 2008 as part of VMR Budget process Security Incidents per "x" Boardings N/A To be provided in Spring, 2008 as part of VMR Budget process On-time Performance 95% Rail (Peer data is 98%) Miles between Failures 25,000 Rail (Peer data shows 35,000 with outliers excluded) Customer Satisfaction 89% Estimate index number based on bus targets Other Rail Measures in New Starts but not in RPTA Measures Framework Capital cost Annual vehicle miles Annual hours of service Frequency by route Operating days and hours Frequency and type of service affected by implementation of rail Aggregate level of service provided Capacity of service provided Transit service area Vehicle revenue miles required to operate service Vehicle revenue hours required to operate service Rail boardings by station New trips using New Start Ridership on tranist routes effected by the project Ridership on the transit system as a whole New riders on transit Systemwide fare revenue