Service Monitoring Report
(this page intentionally left blank)
Title VI Service Monitoring Report March 24, 7
Purpose and Requirements Required once every three years by FTA as part of RT s Title VI civil rights program RT must evaluate all fixed-route modes against six mandatory service standards Analysis identifies potential disparate impacts to minority populations or disproportionate burdens to low-income populations RT must choose a representative sample of routes RT s Service Standards recommend including all routes, except for contract service, supplemental service, special event service, demonstration projects, etc. RT Board is required to review and approve findings If disparate impacts exist, RT is required to take corrective action to remedy the disparities to the greatest extent possible 2
Summary of 7 Findings Passenger Loading all routes meet standards Productivity several bus routes below standard, but no pattern of discrimination On-Time Performance several bus routes below standard, but no pattern of discrimination Coverage meets standards Vehicle Assignment meets standards Amenities five benches are needed at bus stops in minority areas 3
Corrective Action Where ADA and other siting rules allow, RT s Facilities Department will install non-ad-supported benches to correct this deficiency Transfer of five benches to minority areas would correct disparity Eligible bench sites limited by ADA and property owners Goal: Install five benches in minority areas over next year 4
Definitions FTA s service monitoring process focuses on minority routes FTA defines a minority person as anyone who is American Indian or Alaska ative, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, or ative Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. FTA defines a minority area as an area where the percent of minority residents exceeds the average for RT s service area FTA defines a minority route as a route where more than 1/3 of the route s miles go through a minority area. 26 of 47 bus routes are minority routes RT voluntarily follows same process for low-income routes FTA defines a low-income person as a person whose household income is at or below the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) poverty guidelines. 5
6
7
8
9
1
11
Minority and Low-Income Routes Route 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 15 19 22 24 25 26 28 29 3 33 34 38 47 51 54 55 56 61 62 65 67 68 72 74 75 8 81 82 84 85 86 87 88 93 95 13 19 ame GREEBACK RIVERSIDE RIVERSIDE EXPRESS MEADOWVIEW - VALLE HI LAD PARK POCKET EXPRESS TRUXEL ROAD ORTHGATE RIO LIDA BLVD - O ST RIO LIDA SURISE - CITRUS HEIGHTS ARDE EL CAMIO MADISO - GREEBACK MARCOI FULTO FAIR OAKS - FOLSOM BLV ARDE - CALIFORIA AVE J ST DOS RIOS McKILE P/Q STREETS PHOEIX PARK BROADWA - STOCKTO CETER PARKWA SCOTTSDALE POCKET - CRC FRUITRIDGE FREEPORT FRAKLI - UIV/65TH FRAKLI 44TH ST ROSEMOT - LICOL VILLAGE ITERATIOAL MATHER FIELD WATT AVE - ELKHOR FLORI - 65TH ST HOWE - 65TH ST WATT AVE - ORTH HIGHLADS McCLELLA PARK SA JUA - SILVER EAGLE HOWE WEST EL CAMIO HILLSDALE CITRUS HEIGHTS - ATELOPE AUBUR BLVD HAZEL EXPRESS Percent Minority 1% 53% 64% 1% 43% 61% 88% 98% 62% 28% 3% 52% 17% % 8% 2% 17% 25% 25% 85% 9% 32% 1% 66% 1% 1% 1% 55% 41% 79% 58% 66% % 91% 95% 15% 94% 1% 15% 4% 93% 5% 8% 7% % 25% 32% Percent Low-Income 58% 3% 32% 71% 32% 37% 58% 85% 75% 52% 25% 66% 44% 16% 5% 6% 42% 55% 58% 1% 32% 67% 82% 82% 57% 92% 73% 56% 31% 62% 76% 84% 34% % 92% 56% 51% 44% 5% 87% 89% 72% 78% 42% 17% 32% 35% Minority Route Low-Income Route Minority and Low Income Routes The population of RT s service area is 53.2 percent minority 2.1 percent low-income 26 of 47 bus routes are minority routes (55%) 37 of 47 bus routes are low-income routes (79%) All three light rail lines are low-income routes Two of the three light rail lines are minority routes (Blue and Green lines only) Supplemental and contract service is excluded from analysis 12
Vehicle Loading Standards RT considers a route to be overloaded if 25 percent or more of one-way vehicle trips are regularly overloaded. For example, for an hourly route with 32 one-way vehicle trips per day, if 8 or more trips are overloaded, then the route is considered overloaded. For period 9/6/15 to 9/3/16, no trips met this criteria, so no routes would be considered overloaded. Seated Standing Total Load Factor 4ft Low-Floor Bus 34 26 6 1.8 25ft Cutaway Bus 12 5 17 1.4 27ft Cutaway Bus 16 6 22 1.4 28ft Body-on-Chassis Bus 8 29 1.4 32ft Cutaway Bus 3 1 4 1.3 8ft Siemens Light Rail Vehicle 64 64 128 2. 84ft CAF Light Rail Vehicle 64 64 128 2. 88.5ft UTDC Light Rail Vehicle 67 67 134 2. Vehicle Type Other Vehicle Types Determined as eeded 13
Vehicle Loading Monday - Friday Route 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 15 19 22 24 25 26 28 29 3 33 34 38 47 51 47 bus routes evaluated routes below standard ame Greenback Riverside Riverside Express Meadowview-Valley Hi Land Park Pocket Express Truxel Road orthgate Rio Linda Blvd-O Street Rio Linda Sunrise Arden El Camino Madison-Greenback Marconi Fulton Fair Oaks-Folsom Arden-California Avenue J Street (DASH) Dos Rios McKinley P/Q Streets Phoenix Park Broadway-Stockton Trips Daily Trips Overloaded 1 26 8 31 27 6 43 31 56 29 7 28 65 27 55 52 32 4 116 6 27 29 24 143 % Overld % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % MI LI Route 54 55 56 61 62 65 67 68 72 74 75 8 81 82 84 85 86 87 88 93 95 13 19 ame Center Parkway Scottsdale Pocket-C.R.C. Fruitridge Freeport Franklin South Franklin 44th Street Rosemont-Lincoln Village International Mather Field Watt-Elkhorn Florin-65th Street Howe-65th Street Watt Avenue-orth Highlands McClellan Shuttle San Juan-Silver Eagle Howe West El Camino Hillsdale Citrus Heights-Antelope Rd Auburn Blvd Hazel Express Trips Daily Trips Overloaded 31 52 66 31 6 28 58 59 63 29 14 32 119 66 28 14 61 55 59 55 8 4 % Overld % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % MI 14 LI
Vehicle Loading Route 1 11 15 19 25 26 3 38 51 54 55 56 62 67 68 72 75 8 81 82 84 86 87 88 93 ame Greenback Truxel Road Rio Linda Blvd-O Street Rio Linda Sunrise El Camino Marconi Fulton J Street (DASH) P/Q Streets Broadway-Stockton Center Parkway Scottsdale Pocket-C.R.C. Freeport Franklin 44th Street Rosemont-Lincoln Village Mather Field Watt-Elkhorn Florin-65th Street Howe-65th Street Watt Avenue-orth Highlands San Juan-Silver Eagle Howe West El Camino Hillsdale Trips Daily Trips Overloaded % Overld MI 66 % 26 % 29 % 2 % 42 % 53 % % % 53 % 25 % 68 % 24 % 19 % 55 % 29 % 28 % 28 % % 11 % 29 % 6 % 31 % 2 % 28 % 29 % 26 % 22 % LI Saturday 27 bus routes below standard 15
Vehicle Loading Sunday/Holiday Route 1 15 19 26 3 38 51 55 56 67 68 72 75 8 81 82 86 87 88 93 ame Greenback Rio Linda Blvd-O Street Rio Linda Sunrise El Camino Fulton J Street (DASH) P/Q Streets Broadway-Stockton Scottsdale Pocket-C.R.C. Franklin 44th Street Rosemont-Lincoln Village Mather Field Watt-Elkhorn Florin-65th Street Howe-65th Street San Juan-Silver Eagle Howe West El Camino Hillsdale Trips Daily Trips Overloaded 63 26 2 3 28 2 28 2 5 16 27 28 28 22 11 29 28 26 22 % Overld % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % MI LI 22 bus routes below standard 16
Vehicle Loading Light Rail Three light rail lines with weekday service; two with weekend service. Trips below standard. Line Blue Gold Green Service M-F Sat Sun M-F Sat Sun M-F Daily Trips 135 76 66 135 74 66 6 Trips Overloaded % Overld % % % % % % % MI LI 17
Productivity/Headways Standards Light rail runs at 15 or 3 minute Productivity Standards Service Type headways. Minimum Maximum Regular bus routes connecting with boardings boardings Regular Weekday Bus Service 2 4 per hour per hour light rail usually run at multiples of 15 boardings boardings Saturday Bus Service 15 35 per hour per hour minute headways to facilitate boardings boardings Sunday/Holiday Bus Service 15 35 transferring. per hour per hour boardings boardings 15 3 Regular headways should not exceed Community Bus Service per hour per hour boardings boardings 6 minutes on any trunk or branch Peak-Only Light Rail Feeder 15 34 per trip per trip boardings boardings line. Peak-Only Downtown Express 25 34 per trip per trip Headways on peak-only routes are boardings max load Supplemental Service 25 62 per trip based on passenger loads and are boardings max load Light Rail Weekdays 85 4 per train hr adjusted to match school bell times, boardings max load 65 4 per train hr shift changes, etc., except for light rail Light Rail Weekends cost per cost per Varies passenger Varies passenger Contract Service feeders, which should be timed around the light rail schedule. In areas where headways are 3 to 6 minutes, parallel routes should generally be spaced approximately one mile apart and additional resources should be used to improve headways before adding new routes or branches at closer distances. 18
Below Standard Route 51 87 81 3 56 1 26 72 82 22 15 88 11 8 86 55 84 13 67 25 93 68 62 19 61 38 2 75 5 54 6 28 24 74 65 34 ame Broadway-Stockton Howe Florin-65th Street J Street (DASH) Pocket-C.R.C. Greenback El Camino Fulton Rosemont-Lincoln Village Howe-65th Street Arden Rio Linda Blvd-O Street West El Camino Truxel Road Watt-Elkhorn San Juan-Silver Eagle Scottsdale Watt Avenue-orth Highlands orthgate Franklin Marconi Hillsdale 44th Street Freeport Rio Linda Fruitridge Sunrise P/Q Streets Riverside Mather Field Meadowview-Valley Hi Center Parkway Land Park Fair Oaks-Folsom Madison-Greenback International Franklin South McKinley Boardings per hour MI 33 29 29 28 27 26 24 24 24 24 22 2 2 19 19 18 18 17 16 14 13 13 13 12 12 12 9 Productivity LI Monday Friday 38 regular all-day routes CBS and peak-only routes evaluated separately 14 total routes do not meet standards o significant disparities between minority and non-minority or low income and non-low income Minority on Minority Low-Income on Low-Income Meet Standard Fails Standard Total 14 1 1 8 6 8 6 22 16 31 7 19
Productivity Below Standard Route 51 87 15 67 93 68 81 26 88 25 55 86 1 72 8 3 82 56 84 19 11 75 62 38 54 ame Broadway-Stockton Howe Rio Linda Blvd-O Street Franklin Hillsdale 44th Street Florin-65th Street El Camino Fulton West El Camino Marconi Scottsdale San Juan-Silver Eagle Greenback Rosemont-Lincoln Village Watt-Elkhorn J Street (DASH) Howe-65th Street Pocket-C.R.C. Watt Avenue-orth Highlands Rio Linda Truxel Road Sunrise Mather Field Freeport P/Q Streets Center Parkway Boardings per hour MI 29 28 28 25 25 24 24 24 22 2 18 18 17 15 15 14 12 12 1 9 Saturday LI Five routes are below standard Four of the five routes that are below standard are under by 2 to 6 average boardings per hour. Meet Below Standard Standard Minority on Minority Low-Income on Low-Income 11 11 22 3 2 3 2 Total 14 13 25 2 2
Productivity Standard Below Sunday/Holiday Route 51 81 8 87 86 26 3 15 68 56 88 93 67 82 1 55 72 19 38 75 ame Broadway-Stockton Florin-65th Street El Camino Watt-Elkhorn Howe San Juan-Silver Eagle Fulton J Street (DASH) Rio Linda Blvd-O Street 44th Street Pocket-C.R.C. West El Camino Hillsdale Franklin Howe-65th Street Greenback Scottsdale Rosemont-Lincoln Village Rio Linda Sunrise P/Q Streets Mather Field Boardings per hour MI 29 26 22 22 2 2 2 2 19 19 19 18 18 16 16 16 14 13 13 1 1 LI Routes, 38 and 75 are long-term low productivity routes but provide important coverage and connectivity with transit centers and light rail. Five total routes are below standard, with no significant disparities between minority and non-minority or low income and non-low income. Meet Standard Minority on Minority Low-Income on Low-Income 1 7 17 Below Standard 1 4 4 1 Total 11 11 1
Productivity CBS Route 33 47 95 85 ame Dos Rios Phoenix Park Citrus Heights-Antelope Rd McClellan Shuttle Boardings per hour MI 24 11 6 3 LI Peak-Only Route 3 7 29 19 13 ame Riverside Express Pocket Express Arden-California Avenue Hazel Express Auburn Blvd Boardings per Trip MI 35 34 29 26 2 LI Productivity standards for CBS are 15 boardings per revenue hour CBS analysis excludes contract service, e.g., Rancho Cordovan Productivity standards for peak-only buses are 25 boardings per trip for downtown expresses and 15 boardings per trip for light rail feeders All peak-only buses meet RT s productivity standards 22
Productivity Light Rail Line Blue Gold Green Service M-F Sat Sun M-F Sat Sun M-F Boardings per train hr 152 92 79 15 89 79 29 Max Load 8 51 46 84 5 41 5 MI LI Blue and Gold line are meeting productivity standards for all service types. Green line is below standard by 56 boardings per train hour for Monday Friday service. All three lines are low-income routes, and two of the three lines are minority routes
On-Time Performance Standard RT s target is for the bus system to be 85 percent on-time or better. Individual routes are expected to be within one standard deviation of 85 percent on-time or better. For Title VI purposes, all routes are expected to be within one standard deviation of the actual systemwide average or better. On-time performance for RT s light rail system is measured at the starting point of each trip. Trains are considered on-time if they depart to 5 minutes late. RT s target is for the light rail system to be 97 percent on-time or better. 24
Route 85 75 24 1 72 47 5 88 56 3 2 13 82 13 62 28 95 87 68 25 38 86 67 65 61 55 81 51 93 84 74 6 34 7 15 8 22 3 26 54 33 11 19 19 29 ame McClellen Shuttle Mather Field Madison-Greenback Greenback Rosemont-Lincoln Village Phoenix Park Meadowview-Valley Hi West El Camino Pocket-C.R.C. J Street (DASH) Riverside Express orthgate Howe-65th Street Auburn Blvd. Freeport Fair Oaks-Folsom Citrus Heights-Antelope Rd Howe 44th Street Marconi P/Q Street San Juan-Silver Eagle Franklin Franklin South Fruitridge Scottsdale Florin-65th Street Broadway-Stockton Hillsdale Watt Avenue-orth Highlands International Land Park McKinley Pocket Express Rio Linda Blvd-O Street El Camino Sunrise Watt-Elkhorn Arden-California Avenue Riverside Express Fulton Center Parkway Dos Rios Truxel Road Rio Linda Hazel Express Arden-California Avenue Average % On-time 99.9% 95.% 89.9% 83.3% 81.7% 8.9% 79.8% 79.6% 79.3% 78.9% 78.1% 77.8% 77.5% 76.8% 76.6% 75.9% 74.8% 74.3% 74.1% 73.8% 73.3% 72.3% 72.1% 71.8% 71.5% 71.1% 7.% 69.8% 69.5% 69.2% 69.2% 69.1% 68.7% 68.5% 67.% 65.8% 65.7% 65.1% 64.7% 62.% 61.7% 61.5% 61.3% 6.% 57.4% 55.7% 43.2% MI LI y On-Time Performance Monday Friday System goal is 85. percent on-time Actual system average is 71.4 percent Title VI goal is to equal or exceed 61.5 percent Within one standard deviation of actuals Five routes are below standard 2 of 5 deficient routes are minority All deficient routes are low-income * 78% of all routes are low-income Passenger survey data from Routes 29 and 19 show ridership is much higher-income than service area * For Service Monitoring, low-income status is determined by demographics of area served by route 25
On-Time Performance Saturday Route 75 72 82 62 11 1 3 38 84 8 81 86 51 87 93 15 56 54 26 88 25 68 67 55 19 ame Mather Field Rosemont-Lincoln Village Howe-65th Street Freeport Truxel Road Greenback Sunrise J Street (DASH) P/Q Streets Watt Avenue-orth Highlands Watt-Elkhorn El Camino Florin-65th Street San Juan-Silver Eagle Broadway-Stockton Howe Hillsdale Rio Linda Blvd-O Street Pocket-C.R.C. Center Parkway Fulton West El Camino Marconi 44th Street Franklin Scottsdale Rio Linda Average % On-time 95.% 93.4% 88.8% 87.1% 83.6% 82.9% 82.9% 8.7% 78.2% 76.7% 76.6% 76.3% 75.7% 75.2% 74.8% 71.1% 7.8% 69.2% 68.4% 67.1% 66.6% 65.1% 59.8% 57.2% 56.4% 54.5% 41.9% MI LI Five routes are below standard 3 of 5 deficient routes are minority All deficient routes are low-income o evidence of disparate impact 92.5% of Saturday routes are low-income 26
On-Time Performance Sunday/Holiday Route 75 72 82 1 93 86 26 81 38 3 15 87 51 68 67 56 8 55 19 88 ame Mather Field Rosemont-Lincoln Village Howe-65th Street Sunrise Greenback Hillsdale San Juan-Silver Eagle Fulton Florin-65th Street P/Q Streets J Street (DASH) Rio Linda Blvd-O Street Howe El Camino Broadway-Stockton 44th Street Franklin Pocket-C.R.C. Watt-Elkhorn Scottsdale Rio Linda West El Camino Average % On-time 95.% 93.8% 9.5% 89.7% 88.7% 86.7% 85.9% 84.6% 8.3% 79.7% 78.6% 78.4% 76.4% 74.9% 71.6% 68.8% 68.6% 66.5% 65.7% 61.2% 59.9% 59.7% MI LI Four routes are below standard 2 of 4 deficient routes are minority All deficient routes are low-income o evidence of disparate impact 95% of all Sunday/Holiday routes are low-income 27
On-Time Performance Light Rail The Blue Line and Gold Line are currently operating above the On-Time Performance standard of 97.%. The Green Line is slightly deficient; however, it carries less than 1% of light rail passengers and is only deficient by.8%. Route 57 533 519 ame Gold Blue Green Average % On-time 98.4% 97.3% 96.2% MI LI 28
Service Area Coverage What percent of RT s service area is actually served? Four standards (shown below) 3/4-mile distance used for complementary ADA paratransit and ational Transit Database reporting 1/4-mile from bus route and 1/2-mile from light rail stations identified by FTA as typical walking distances to transit Frequent service means 15-minute or better headways Distance Basic Local Service High Frequency Service.75 miles from bus routes.75 miles from rail stations 85% of population 2% of population.25 miles from bus routes.5 miles from rail stations 5% of population 1% of population 29
3
Service Coverage Service Area Total Total Population1 Area (sqmi)2,3 Percent of Pop. Minority 1,176,865 367 626,138 4,441 - - 53.2% 2.1% Basic Service 3/4 Mile Total Total Population Area (sqmi) Pop. Coverage Minority Service Area Coverage Low-Income Low-Income 1,42,425 226 548,926-2,51-89% 88% 94% All coverage standards are currently being met. Standards: Basic Service 1/4 Mile5 Total Total Population Area (sqmi) Pop. Coverage 677,117 13 58% Minority 368,277 59% Low-Income 159,158 68% Distance Basic Local Service High Frequency Service 3/4-Mile 85% of population 2% of population 1/4-Mile 5% of population 1% of population High Frequency 3/4 Mile Total Total Population Area (sqmi) Pop. Coverage 415,434 76 35% Minority 24,72 38% Low-Income 12,561 44% High Frequency 1/4 Mile5 Total Total Population Area (sqmi) Pop. Coverage Minority Low-Income 28,617 39 118,91-53,673-18% 19% % 1. Source: U.s. Census Bureau, Amer. Community Survey ACS 5, 5-year dataset 2. Service area of 367 square miles represents RT's service area, per PUC 3. Area also includes Citrus Heights, which is not officially annexed into RT; excludes Rancho Murieta. 4. Percent low-income is computed using a total population of only 1,165,124 for which low-income status is actually determined. 5. 1/4 mile from bus routes and 1/2 mile from light rail stations 31
Vehicle Assignment Bus Vehicle assignments are tracked in database Compute the average vehicle age for each route Compute average vehicle age for all minority routes Compare to average vehicle age for RT s overall system Computations weighted by number of vehicle trips per day on each route Light Rail Vehicle assignments are not tracked electronically Random passenger surveys include vehicle number Estimate average vehicle age for each of three lines Compare each line and percent minority of each line 32
Route 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 15 19 22 24 25 26 28 29 3 33 34 34 38 51 54 55 56 61 62 65 67 68 72 74 75 Average Vehicle Age 8.1 1.9 11.4 9.6 5.4 1.3 9.2 8.8 9. 5.5 4.3 8.3 9.1 11.3 5.7 8.5 6.3 1.8 11. 9.1 11.3 8.5 7. 8.1 1.7 11.2 5.6 8.2 7.2 8.6 9.4 9.3 9.8 8.4 8.4 MI LI Route 8 81 82 84 85 86 87 88 93 95 13 19 17 171 172 173 175 176 177 178 25 26 1 2 3 4 226 227 228 246 247 248 252 255 Average Vehicle Age 4.9 8.9 6.3 6.7 8. 9.7 9.6 8.8 1.4 7.1 11.4 11.6 4.1 4.1 4. 4.1 7. 7. 7. 7. 13. 12.9 12.3 12.6 1.1 12.1 11.4 12.8 13.3 12.9 12.8 12.9 11.9 12.9 1.7 MI LI Vehicle Assignment Monday - Friday Vehicles on minority routes average.2 years older ot a significant disparity Average Vehicle Age RT System Minority Routes Low-Income Routes 9.1 9.3 8.8 33
Vehicle Assignment Route 1 11 15 19 25 26 3 38 51 54 55 56 62 67 68 72 75 8 81 82 84 86 87 88 93 Average Vehicle Age 7.8 7.9 5.5 4.7 6. 5.6 4.5 5.4 8.4 4.8 7.7 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.9 4.7 4.7 7.7 7.8 4.7 4.4 5.2 7.2 4.8 4.8 5.3 6.7 MI LI Saturday Vehicles on minority routes average.1 year older ot a significant disparity Average Vehicle Age RT System 6.2 Minority Routes 6.3 Low-Income Routes 6.1 34
Vehicle Assignment Route 1 15 19 26 3 38 51 55 56 67 68 72 75 8 81 82 86 87 88 93 Average Vehicle Age 7.8 5.4 6. 5.5 5.6 5.3 8.1 5.4 5.5 7.7 7.3 5.4 5.3 7.9 8. 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.5 5.5 6.3 5.3 Sunday/Holiday MI LI Vehicles on low-income routes average.1 year older ot a significant disparity Average Vehicle Age RT System Minority Routes Low-Income Routes 6.1 6.1 6.2 35
Vehicle Assignment Light Rail Line Blue Gold Green Average Vehicle Age 2.6 2.9 3.2 MI LI Train consists on the Blue Line and Gold Line can be and often are composed of mixed vehicle types for various reasons, including service and maintenance scheduling, voltage requirements, and performance. The Green Line uses a specially wrapped light rail vehicle. o significant disparities between that of the average car age and the ridership demographics. 36
Transit Amenity Distribution Bus Stops RT s Title VI goal is for the percent of bus stops in minority areas equipped with benches/shelters to equal or exceed that for RT s overall service area. If a deficiency is found requiring corrective action, then, where ADA and other siting rules allow, RT will install benches/shelters to correct the deficiency. If ADA or other siting rules prevent RT from adding benches/shelters where desired, RT will notify the applicable city or county. ew benches and shelters paid for by RT are located according to a number of factors including, but not limited to, the following: Average daily boardings at the stop Prevalence of disabled passengers Presence or absence of amenities in the nearby area (e.g., shelter, trash cans, seating, lighting, etc.) Cost for additional curb, gutter, street, or sidewalk improvements Financial assistance from local jurisdictions, business improvement districts, etc. Minimum ridership of 4 daily boardings for shelters Title VI compliance 37
Transit Amenity Distribution Minority Census Tracts - Bus Benches 3,39 stops in RT service area. Just over 1/4 have benches. Minority stops are less likely to be equipped with benches. Five additional benches in minority areas would close gap Goal: Install five benches in minority areas over next year Minority on-minority Total Stops w/ % with Tot Stops Benches Benches 1,314 352 26.8% 1,725 473 27.4% 3,39 825 27.1% 38 Source: prepared March 7
Transit Amenity Distribution Minority Census Tracts - Bus Shelters 3,39 stops in RT service area. 13 percent have shelters. Minority areas equipped with shelters exceed that for RT s overall service area. Minority on-minority Total Stops w/ % with Tot Stops Shelters Shelters 1,314 173 13.2% 1,725 7 12.6% 3,39 39 12.8% Source: prepared March 7 39
Transit Amenity Distribution Low Income Census Tracts - Bus Benches Title VI does not require amenity analysis for lowincome populations. 3,39 stops in RT service area. Approximately 1/3 have benches. Low-Income areas equipped with benches exceed that for RT s overall service area. Low-Income on-low-income Total Stops w/ % with Tot Stops Benches Benches 1,228 389 31.7% 1,811 436 24.1% 3,39 825 27.1% Source: prepared March 7 4
Transit Amenity Distribution Low Income Census Tracts - Bus Shelters Title VI does not require amenity analysis for lowincome populations. 3,39 stops in RT service area. 15 percent have shelters. Low Income areas equipped with shelters exceed that for RT s overall service area. Low-Income on-low-income Total Stops w/ % with Tot Stops Shelters Shelters 1,228 19 15.5% 1,811 2 11.% 3,39 39 12.8% Source: prepared March 7 41
Transit Amenity Distribution Light Rail Stations Amenities for light rail stations are distributed according to estimated ridership. Older stations may have been built to more limited standards. Improvements are programmed as part of RT s long-range capital program, as funding permits, to bring them into compliance with standards regarding the following amenities: a) Shelters j) Information display cases b) Mini-High Shelters k) Dynamic Message Signs c) Drinking fountains l) Fare Vending Machines d) Seating (main platform) m) Smart Card Addfare Machines e) Seating (mini-high platform) n) Smart Card Tap Devices f) Trash receptacles o) Elevators g) Recycling receptacles p) Tree shading h) Bicycles racks q) Artwork i) Bicycle lockers For purposes of this policy, a center platform is considered 1 platform whether it serves one or two tracks. RT s Title VI goal is to meet the above-stated goals for seating and shelter. If, during the Service Monitoring process, RT is found deficient in this goal with respect to minority or low-income areas, RT will incorporate Title VI status into its capital development process to correct the deficiency. 42
Transit Amenity Distribution Light Rail Stations STATIO 12th & I Street 13th Street 16th Street rd Street 29th Street4 39th Street 47th Avenue 48th Street 4th Ave/Wayne Hultgren 59th Street 7th & Capitol 7th & I/County Center 7th & Richards/Township 9 8th & Capitol 8th & H/County Center 8th & K 8th & O1 Alkali Flat/La Valentina2 Archives Plaza1 Arden/Del Paso Broadway Butterfield Cathedral Square1 Center Parkway City College College Greens Cordova Town Center Platform Shelter Mini-High Shelter IB OB IB OB - - - - STATIO CRC Florin Fruitridge2 Franklin Glenn3 Globe2 Hazel3 Historic Folsom3 Iron Point3 Marconi/Arcade Mather Field/Mills Meadowview Power Inn Roseville Road3 Royal Oaks Sacramento Valley3 9th & K Street1 Starfire Sunrise Swanston Tiber University/65th Street Watt/I-8 Watt/I-8 West Watt/Manlove Zinfandel Platform Shelter IB OB Mini-High Shelter IB OB - - 1. Station is considered a Transit Mall 2. Station has a center platform that serve both the inbound and outbound direction 3. Station situated along single track providing one platform shelter shared by both the inbound and outbound direction 4. 29th Street station is located under a freeway overpass functioning as a shelter 43
Conclusion Corrective action needed to remedy slight disparity in bench distribution Where ADA and other siting rules allow, RT s Facilities Department will install non-ad-supported benches to correct this deficiency Goal: Install five benches in minority areas over next year 44