USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

1992 performance evaluation of Florida transit systems : part I : trend analysis, 1984-1992

' On 20.78 43.67% . n f a n/a -; .. . . 1 7.48 . l.33%

PAGE 72

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE S U PP L Y Vehicle Miles P e r Capita SERVICE CO NSUMPTION Passenger rrips Per Capba < P3nenger Trip$ Per Reve nue M ile Passe n ger Trips Pe r Revenue Ho u r QUALITY OF SERVICE Aver<'lge Spe. e d (RM.IR.H.} Average Age o f Fleet (in years) N u mber of lncidenl.$ Total Roadcal t s Revenue Miles Between Incidents (000) Reven u e Miles B etween R oadca ll s (000) AVAILABILITY Revenue M ile s Per Rou t e Mile (000 ) TABLE III-A14 Mclro -O: tde Transit Agency System Total Effectiveness-Me:1sun.s 1987 1988 1989 1990 14 .65 1 5 .25 15 .56 1 5.95 40.35 36. 6 1 40.45 39.81 3 .13 2 70 2.91 U9 44.07 38.35 39.4 1 37.58 14. 0 7 14.18 13.55 13.47 nla nl a nla nl a nla n /a nla ()/3 nla nla n la nl a nla nla n l a nla nla nla n la nla 1 4.53 15 .36 15.35 15.26 1991 1992 % 1 987-19 2 1 5 .36 17.78 21.35% 37.42 41.72 3 .39% 2 .7 1 2 64 15. 71% 39.87 37.46 1 4 .99'.4 14.7 1 1 4 19 0 .85% n l a nla n la n la nla nlo nla nla nla nla nla nlo nla n la n/a 17 .37 1 6 .69 14.86% 4 7

PAGE 73

EFFICIENCY MEASURES COS T EFF I CI ENCY Operating Expense Per Capi t a Opetating Expense P e r Peak Vehic l e {000) Operatin g Expense Per Passenger Trfp Operating ExpeMe Pef Passenger Mile Operatin g Expense Per Reven ue Mile OpcraLing E.xpenso P e r Revenue Hour Maintenance Expense Per Reven u e Mile Ma intenan ce Exp. Per Operating Exp. O PERATING RATIOS Farebok Recove' "'., ,.. '$5.09 : .. $5.12 0.71% . . $65.31 $64 .84 3 .09% $1.27 : -; .$1. 27 '< 19 .17'Jb '- 25.01 % 24.78% -19.74% "',. ,., . ... '38. 07% 26 25% <. ; "" 84.16% 81.46% 9.38% 40. 29% 38.96% 20.83% ;.-' ""' ... 49.73 .. 46.26 30% ,, '" .,_.,._ .<.-< 3 .79 3 .66 8 95% 0 .88 0.87 1 .89'11. ... 35. 61 35.60 2 50% ;'!, .;, -. >' ;';. 2.81 0 14% 0.94 ' ;;. _ ,_. <> :I,. 0 .96 :. - ... 1 5 .97% ... 33 18 32.93 2 .32% -: 3.60 ',3 .57 9 .76% .,. nta nf '" > ... :,;; .,. .. ,,: $0. 7 1 54 .52'1> --------.

PAGE 74

EFFIC I ENCY MEASURES COST E F F I CIEI'ICY Opecatil\g Excense Per Capita < Opetati ng Expense Per Pea k Vehicle (000) Opotating Expense Pet Pj,$$enger Trip . Oper31ing Expense Pet Passenger Mil e Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile . . . Operat ing Expense Pef Revenue Hour Maintenance ExpenSe Per Revenue Mit e .. ' Mainten8tlc e Elcp. Per Opera t ing Exp. OPERATING RATIOS Fac ebox Recovel)l Local Revenue Per Operat ing Expenso Operati n g Revenue P et Op.ora.ting Expense VEHIC l E UTiliZATION Vehicle Mlles Per Pea k Vehide (000 ) Veh icle Hou r s Per Pc.ak VehiCle (000) Revenue Milot Per Vehicl e Mites Reven u o Miles Por Total Voh iclos (000} Rev e nue Hours Pel To t al Vehicles {000) LABOR PAOOUCTJVJTY Revenuo H9u r s Employeo (000) Passenger T tips P e r Emp loyee (000) ENERGY U TiliZATION Voh lde M ilos Per G.alloo Vehicle M lles P e r KilowattHr FARE Average F ate TABLElll-A16 Mclro-Dade Transi l Agency Purchased Molorbus Efricicncy Measures 1 987 1988 1989 1990 $0.29 $0.84 $2.29 nfa $64.3 2 $$3.90 $88 73 $3.14 $2.87 $1.09 $1.12 $0.4 1 $0.24 $0. 27 $0.30 $4.22 $ 1 .66 $1.68 $2.05 $70.27 $33 .19 $24.47 $30.60 nfa nfa .,. nfa n/a .,. .,. .,. 13. 94% 24.26% 48.1&% 100.00% 100. 00% 100 .00CJI; 13 94% 24.26% 48. 16% 45.32
PAGE 75

50 EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Operating Eltpense Per Cap ita TABLEDI-Al7 Metro Dade Transit Agency D irccllywOpc-ratcd and Purchased Motorbus Efriciency Measures 1987 1988 $51.10 1989 $52. 21 $203.7 3 1990 $53. 31 $21 9.71 1991 $53.02 $217. 14 1992 $62.52 5 1 40.86 %Change 1987Ht92 22. 35% n{a Operat ing Per Peak Veh ide (OC()) Opotatirtg Expense P e r Passenger T r i p Expense P e r Pusenge t M il e Operating Ell.pense Per Revenue M i l e Operati n g Elcpense Per Revenue Hour Maln1enJM!e Expenso Per Aovonue Mile M a in1enance Exp. Per Ope r a t ing Exp n{a $ 1 .55 $0.40 $5.07 $62.93 $51.08 $220. 91 $1.75 $0.46 $4.83 $60.76 ;:. . ; $1.62 l'< .,, . $1 .85 / '>'< t: : n/a 1 n{a nfa n{a ,.; So.63 $0.46 $4.90 $63.97 n{a n{a 38.40% 84.49% < ... $ 1 .94 $0.46 ',.,,. ... ::.--:>.<;, 't: ,, $62.86 n ;a n {a w .,; -;; 37.0 1 % v 82. 15% 24.65% 2.02% .0.11% nfa n{a 23.12% -8.70% '.., 40. 01% 37.a7% I "'' _,;:,:&.% 5Q.33 3.79 0 .88 37.07 32. 53 2 5 9 ; : o .87 25.79 < 2 84 ;:; .'1 '.-.:,..' 2.04 n{a n{a n{a -. n {a n{a n{a n{a . ,., ' .. $0.71 so. 1 2 I n{a n{a 1.46% nfa n{o n;a n { a nfa n / a 53.47%

PAGE 76

EFFICIENC Y MEASURES COST EF F I C I E NCY Operating Expens.o P e r C3pita Oper at ing Expense Per Peak Vehicl e (000} Oper at ing Expense Per PaS$en ger T r ip Opor at i n g f)(pense Per Passeng e r M i l e Opera t ing Expe nse Pe r Revenue Mile Operating Expense Per Revenue Hour Maintonancil : 'f>(Pense P e r M il e Mai ntenance E xp P e r O p erat i n g Exp. OP E AATING PATIOS Farebol< Recovery l ocal P.eve n ue P e r Oper atin g Expe n$ e Ope r a l i n g Revenue Pet O p etating Expe nse V E HIClE UTiliZATION Veh i cle M i lts P er Peak Veh i c l e {000} Veh i c l e H ou t s Per Peak Veh iCle (000) Oevenue Mlle.s Per V e hi.ele Mi lO$ Ruven u t Mi les. Per TolaJ Vehi c le s (000) Revenue HOYrs Per Tola1 Veh i c l es {000) U\IJOR PRO D U CTIV ITY R even ue Hol..uS Pei Ef!l p l oycc (000 ) Passenge r Ttips Per Emp l oyee (000} E NERGY U TiliZAT ION Ve hlc fo M ilos Per Gallon Veh;cJe Miles Per Kilowa" Hr FARE Average Far e 19 8 7 $21.98 $556.06 $3.11& $0.50 S8.42 $264. 15 $3. 81 45.25% 1 8 51 % 1 00.00% 19. 7 1 % 68.52 2 .28 0 .97 36 22 1.15 0.28 19.34 n{a 0 1 1 50. 72 TABLEIII-A18 Metro Dade Transit Agency Ropid Rail Efficiency Mc
PAGE 77

52 TABLEnt-AJ9 Metro-Dade Transit Agency Automated Guideway Efficiency Measures EFFICIENCY MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1 992 COST EFFIClEt; $11.96 $17.64 ;:_ :' _,$ 17.9 1 -;;.,;.,':: $,1:s5: < .} .,,,>,, Operat i ng Expense Per Revenue Kout $134 .36 $120.83 $191.137 $194.40 $194 .52 $20 7 .83 54.68% MaintcnMc& &pense Per Revenue Mite .. $9.14 $8.29 $ 12.50 $8.89 '" _, $11.14 . Mai ntenance Exp. Per Operat i ng Exp. 67.46% 69.30% 70. 88% 49.67"4 52.96 % OPERATING RATIOS Farebox Recovery 7.71'% 8 23% 6.67% S.9S% 5 33% : 4.55% 4 1, 02% -..... ..... . . Loea t Aevenu e Per Operating Expense 100.00'% 100 .00'% 100.00 % 100 00% 100.00% 100. 00% 0 .00% Operating Revenue Pet Operating Expenso. 7.71% : r ... 6.67% , 5.95% ; .. -' 4.55% ,;, <;, .02" VEHI CLE UTIUZATION Vehicle Miles Per P ea k Vehi cle (000) 35.64 36.35 32.6 8 4 1.28 46.6 1 .'45.41' ;;_t. 27.44% Vehicle Hou rs Per Peak Vehi cle { 000) 3.45 3 .57 3.00 3.83 4 .29 4.1 7 20. 61% RevCt'luC Miles Per VehiCle Miles 0 .93 0.96 1 .00 0.97 0.9$ 0.90 31% "' Revenue Miles Per Total Veh icles {000} 30.23 32.10 29.90 30 02 33. 30 30.80 1.85% ---'< "'.. Revenue Hou r s PerTotaiVehicles{OOO) 3.05 3 18 2,75 '-' 2.77 .. ... 3 06 '". 2 .83 ?:. 7.37"4 LABOR PRODUCTNITY Revenue Houts Per Emproyee (000) o .ss 0.60 0 56 ''-. 0 46 0.43 ,,,. -22.32% . . P as$enger Trips Per Employee {000) 49.57 54 .88 57.98 44.62 37.03 34.08 -31.25% ENERGY UTILIZATION Vehi cle Ml!n Per Ga llo n nja nfa y-' nja .... nfa ..;, -j; nfa Vehi cle Miles Per Kilowan-Hr 0.09 0.16 0.16 0 .17 0.17 0.17 91 .30'% FARE Average fare ,-$0.12 $0. 12 : $0. 13 so.i2; 3.07% -. ---------------------. .

PAGE 78

T AULEUI-A20 Metro Dade Trnsil Agency System Total Efficiency Measun'S (Excluding Purchased Mot orbus) EFFICIENCY MEASU RES 1987 198ll 1989 1990 1991 COS T EFFICIENCY PofC3p ita .. $75.52 $73. 12 $73.67 $75.64 578 .07 Operating Expense Per Peak Vehicle (000) $269.Q1 $276.57 $279.35 $291 .31 $276.93 Oporo.ting E:x.Perise Trip $ 1 .88 $2.01 $1.92 52.02 $2. 1 2 Operat ing E.x.pense Per Passenger Mil e $0. 44 SOA8 $0.44 SM3 $0.45 Per Revtnue Mile> $5.89 $5.61 $5.88 55.83 $5.92 Operating Expense Per Aevenue Hou r $82.S6 $78.67 $78 .98 $77.78 $86.28 M3intenance Expense Per Reven u e Mile $2.14 $ \ ? 4 $1.80 $1.96 $ 1.91 Maintenance E:xp. Pe r Operat ing Exp. 36. 38% 3 1 0 4 % 30. 62% 33.63% 32. 23% OPERATING RATIOS Frucbox Revery 25.95% 3 1 05% 31.80% 31.53% 34.$5% Loca l Reve n u e Per Oper ating 97.09% 95.12% 89.55% 89.47% ReVenue Per Op'eratln g Expense 27.71% 33. 18% 33. 91% 33.22% 35. 95% VEHICLE UTIL IZATION Ve hicle M iles Pcr Peak Veh.i<:l e (000) 55.74 55.40 52.61 55.29 52.07 Vehicl e Hours Per P eak Vehi cle (000) 3 .76 3 7 7 3 .76 4 .08 3 .64 R.even ve M i l es Per Ve h ide M i les 0 .88 0.69 0.90 0 .90 0 .90 Reven ue Mil es Per Total Veh icles (000) 34.94 37. 2 1 36 .14 38 .59 37.2.3 ' Revenue Hour s Per Tot al Vehic l e s (000} 2 49 2 .65 2 .69 2 .89 2 .55 LABOR PRODUCTIVITY Revenu' o Hours Per E mployee (000 } 0.70 0 8 1 0 79 0 .87 o .ao Passeng er Trips Per Employee (000) 30.93 3 1 .84 32.65 33 .59 32. 7 4 E N ERGY UTILIZATION Vehic l e Pet Gallon of a of a o;a of a o;a Vehic l e M les Pftl Kilowatt.Hr ofa o;a o;a nfa of a FARE AVer age F are < $ 0 .49 $0.63 S0-61 $0.64 $0.73 .. 1992 % Ch.,ngo $89 22 S259.74 10. 1 3% $2. 1 6 15. 38% $0.45 2.69% $5.95 O.S9% $55.10 2.70% $1 .92 -10.31% 32.34% 11.10% 34 .85% 34.30% 87.49% -6.14% 35.S2% 29.30% 48 .92 12.25% 3 57 4 .96'% 0 .89 1 .51% 36.06 3 20% 2.5 2 1 .37% 0.83 32.82 6 09% o;a n;a n;a n;a $0. 7 5 54 00% 5 3

PAGE 79

. EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICtEI'ICY Operating &pense Per Cap ita Opera11ng Expe nse P e r Peak Veh i cle (000} Ope11t1ng Expense Pet Pu.sc n ge r Tfip Operating Expense Per Pas.senger Mile 0Jal & llng ElCpen s e Per Revenue Mile Optllllng Expe nse Per Revenue Hour M.nlnlonanee &pense Per Aeve.nve M ile Ma Jnlenance &p. Pee Opetatlng Exp. OPERATING RATIOS Al<:oftry Lccal ,.._,.,. Pat ()peta!lng Expense ()pefaing Reveme Pet Opetaling Expen$0 VEHICI.f UTIUZATlON Vehlele Miles Per ?eak V ehicle {000) Vohlclo Hours Pot Peak Ve.hido ( 000 ) Miltt P e t Veh i cle Miles RGVOnuo Miles Per To tal Veh i cles (000 ) Rovonue Hours Pet Total Vehicle$ ( 000) LAOOR PRODUCTIVITY Rtvonut HoutS Per Emp loyee (OCX)) Pasatnget Trips Per Employee (000) EI'IERGY UTILIZATION Vthlclt Mites Per Galton Vthlcl Mites Per KilowJttHt FAAe Avttage Fate --------------54 T ABLEill -A21 Metre>-Dllde Transit Agency Sysltm T oral Efficltnt.y MtoaSurtS 1887 1988 1989 $75,81 $73.96 $75.96 nl $266.1;8 $253. 6 2 $1.88 $2.02 > $1.138 $0.44 $0. 4 7 $0.43 55.88 $5.46 $5.46 $82 80 $77.40 $74.02 nl nla nla I .,. I 2M!"' ao.se ... $2.29'1. 93-2< ... 95.27 ... 27.6!,. 33.DII% 34.34 ... nl 54.98 51.96 nl 3 71 3.68 0.88 0 .89 0.89 I 3 7 .25 36.06 I 2.63 2 .68 I n{a nla I I nla I I nja I I n l a $0.49 $0.63 $0.61 1990 19tl '%Change 1987-1992 $78.ao $79. 1 5 $91.-48 20.66 ... I $270.37 $270.55 $184.34 I $ 1.97 $2. 1 2 (> .. > 15. 70'1. $0.42 $0. 4 5 $() .45 4 .36 ... ... ... .. : ,.,, $5.49 $5.73 $5.79 62% $73.92 $84.34 $82.15 .() ,79% I nla . . nfa I I n f a nla 34.28 ... 34.21 ... 32.00... 8D.61'.C. 87.80% -&4,. 33.63'4 35-&4 ... 35. 16'S 27.1 31(. 55.07 52. 8 3 5.82 n f 4,00 3 .88 2 .63 I 0 .89 0.110 0.89 1.07 % 36.89 97.57 27.58 nf 2 .74 2.55 H o . I .,. .,. n/a .., .-. I nfa .,. nla nla .,. n/a .,. I n f n/1 .,. nla $0.63 $0.72 $().75

PAGE 80

GENERAlQUESTIONS I. Were any fare changes nHtde during fiscal year 1992? I f so, please provide the previous fare slructure as well roached, Metromovcr scrvitt was tcnn iniltcd a t 6:00 p.m. Service w01s restored Otl August 3 J st. The fir st day of service was free and fares ,.,.tre restored on September 1st. HunicaneRclatcd Additional Servi ce (Metrobus Md Purchased T ransportation)-On September 6, 1992, fixe:d-roUie emergency lmnsponation services were initiate-d in South Dade to aid i n t he recoveryeffons; these service. s were funded by the Federal E mergency Management Agency. The service consisted of uddition al service o n d i r ectly-oper:ued motorbus routes and contracted service provided by fOur purchased transpon:ation contractors: ( I ) Mayflower Conttacted Services, Inc. (2) HandiVan, Inc:., (3) Airocar Express, Inc., and (4) Red Top fransp ona tion, Inc. H urricane-Related Additional Service (Demand-Response) Demand-response emergency t r ansport3tion services were implemented in South Dade Ol\ September 6, 1992. These services were funded by the fede ral Emergency M::magcmcnt Agency to aid in meetin g the mobilit)' needs of the areas hard e s t hit by Hurricane Andrew. The services were prov i de d by fou r (l} Maynawec Contr;'l.cted Sef'v\ccs, . (2) Handi-Van, tnc. {3) Airocar Express. Inc., and (4} Red To p Transportatio n Inc, Mclrobus $1;Uistics-Although Metrobus service w::as restored ttfter Hurricane Andre\v on August 28. I 992, 1he service was free of charge. unti l September 1st, an d t he service hours were limited. Ridership statistics wer e not avaibtbl e for these four days which included two weekdays, one Saturday, and o n e Sunday As a result, the annuul service consumption dalit for Unlinked Passenger Trips and Passenger Miles are calculated based on 2 50 weekdays, S l Salurdays, and 57 Sundays. 55

PAGE 81

QUESTIONS AIJOUT 1992 SECTION IS DATA Oirectly Opcratcd Motorbu s Q uestions I. Despite the increase in service evidenced by the increases in t he number of re\enue miles, rout e m ile-s and vehicles operated i n maximum service shown i n the table below, r i dership has declined s l ight ly be tween I 99 I and I 992. Is there a n expla n a tio n? DirectJy.Qperatcd Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 Passenger Trips 55.13t.390 55, 125,220 Revenue M ile s 20,023,620 2 0 ,435 ,340 Ro u t e Mile s 1372. 7 Vehs. Oper i n Max. 458 5 05 System Response: The phenomena of bot h an increase i n service and a decline i n ridership is primarily duet<> the effects of Hurricane Andrew. As discussed in General Questio n 113 on the previous page. the hurricane hit Dade County on August 24, 1992 a n d caused servi ce intem.1ptions on all m odes. 111e service interruptions we.re pan i a lly offset by a n increase i n service resulti n g f rom the i nitiat ion of fixed-route emergency service on Se-pt ember 6 1992, in South D a de to aid ill t he hurricane recoery effons. One component of t his ser"Vice, which was funded b y the Fede.ral Emergen cy Management Agency, was addi tio nal d i rectly-ope rated motorbus service on t h e five majo r routes in the devastated area. Servi ce frequency was increased so that those who did not rel ocate t o t he north e m a reas of the county and w h o no lon ger had private means of transponation c ould traveL The service was de..c:igncd to meet mobility needs and not neecssarily as a means to increase ridership o n th e t ransit system 2 P lease explain the significant increase in capital expen se from SI.08S,230 i n 1991 to $8, 965,630 in 1992. What capital pur chases were mad e in 1992? System Response: MOTA itemi7.ed their capital purchases for FY 1992 as follows: S3.9 million for the purchase of fiftee n 40foot, altern a t i ve fuel buses and the retrofit of five 40-foot buses; $1. I m i llion for maj or improvements a n d refurbishment of bus faci lities; $ 1 .8 million for engine and transmission r e b uild plus t h e capital cost of tire contract; S0.7 mill ion for the purchase of service and support $0.2 mill i o n for the purchase of b u s s hop and compute r equipment; $0.4 million for a bus corridor s tudy; and S0.4 m illion for fuel contami natio n cleanup. 3 The number of vehicles available (54 7 in 1 99 1 574 in L 992) and vehicles operated in maximum service both i n creased signi ficantly between 199 I and 1992. 56 Please explain these increases. System Response: The number of v e hicles operated i n maximum ser v i ce is b ased on t he Spring 1992 u p ln FY 1992, the county was strictly enfo rci ng the Jitney Ordinances and, therefore. MOTA significant I ) increased the peak vehicle requirement to respond to the cust omer demand. In addition, o n September 6, I 992, fixedroute emergency transportation services were ini t iated in South Dade to aid in the h urricane recovery efforts l11is consisted of additio na l service on directly-operated moto rbus routes and contracted routes where service is provided by purchased transportation c ontract ors The majorit y of t he contractors subcontracted w ith jitney operators who had previousl y competed with the directly-operated Mc1robus service.

PAGE 82

. 4. The number ofroadealls increased sign ific antly f rorn S.S01 in 1991 to 9,11 7 in 1992. To what can this significant i ncrease be auributed'? System Response: Roadcalls increased due 10 the use of a significant number of 1980-modcl buses which met federallyapproved retirement c riteria, and an increase in the number of bus mec.hanic vacancies due to a h iring freeze duting a quarter of FY 1992. According to MOTA, these issues are being addresse d Purch:tst:d Motorbus Questions 1. The number of passenger tripS dec reased almos t 33 percent frorn 1,148,340 in 1991 10 769,980 in 1 992. To what can this significant decline in purchas e d motOrbus ride r ship be anributed? System Respo11se: In November 1990, Greyhound Lines, Inc., dct'hulled on the COJllri'ICt for purchased transporunion services under the Private E n terprise Parti cipa tion projecc 11te dec rea se in ride r ship was part i ally offset by the initiation of flxedroute emergency transportmion services on September 6, 1 992, i n response to H urricane Andrew. 2 As i ndicated in t h e tab l e on the followi1tg page, the number of vehicle miles; remained relinive l y swbte while the number of revenue mile. s decreased signil ican!ly and the number of vehicle hours and reve1tue hours both increased significruttly A result o f these changes is a decrease in average speed (revenue tniles per revenue h our) between 199 I and 1992. Please explain these changes. I Purchased Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1 992 %Change Vehide Miles 1.329.200 1 332 ,320 0.2% Revenue M i les 1 2 1 4,670 1 ,097 420 .6% Vehic l e Houts 63,250 91 .730 10 .2 % Revenue Hours 66.360 76.690 1 5.6% Average Spee d 18.31 mph 14 .31 mph -21.8 % System Response: Jlte purchased motorbus service provided in FY 1991 consisted of more express service (han tha t which was provided in F'Y 1992. In FY 1992, there was an increase i n local, weekend service provided by Mayflower. In addition, one component of t h e emergency transportation services initia ted on Sep(ember 6, 1992, was contracte d local circtllitto r service provided by four purchased trnnsportation cont rac tors. n}is type of service a significnnlly lower average speed thM the oorrnal l oc-al service. 3. 'Tlte number of directional route m iles decreased from 140.9 miles in l99J to 102 6 miles in 1992, a decline of mor e tha n 27 percent. Please exp lain. 57

PAGE 83

System Response: Tile directional route miles in f'Y 1991 included one -anda-half months of purchased transportation provided by Greyhound Lines, Inc . as part of the Private Enterprise Participation projecl. Th erefore_ in FY 1992, the directional route mileage involve d in these five routes was applied to the directly operated total instead of the purchased transportation total. 4 Total operating expense increased 29 percent from $2,154,420 in 1991 to S2,779,330 i n 1992 desp it e an apparent decline in purchased motorbus service as evidenced by the aforementioned declines in rc,cnue m iles and routem iles. Is there an explanation? System Total expense increased <15., result of a 36 percent increa!ie in the cost of pure-ha!icd se rvices in rv I 992 cornp.1rcd 10 fY 1991. 5. Passe.nger fare revenue decreased more than 40 percent from $577,960 in 1991 to $344,560 in 1992. Much of t his decline m ay be auributable to the 33 percent decrease in passenger trips during this time. Howeve-r, an II percent decrease in average fare per passenger trip ($0.50 in 1991 ; $0.45 in 1992) indicates that other factors may have been involved. Please explain System Response: The emergency transportation services initiated in South Dade tO aid in the Hurricane Andrew recovery efforts were funded by the Federnl Emergency Management Agency. Therefore, no passenger fares were collected for this service. n1is_ coupled with the 33 percent decline in the number of purchased motorbus passenger trips resulted in the significant drop in passenger fare revenue. 6. Oc.spite the decline in passenger far e revenue, total local revenue increased 29 pcrce.nt from $2,154,420 in 1991 to $2,779,330 in 1992. Please explain this significant increase. System Response: Local revenue i s comprised of passenge r fares and local subsidies llte increase in local revenue represents the amount of additional subsidy neede-d to eover the increase in operating eXJ)C"nses as compared to the prior year. 7. As indicated in the table below, the number of vehicles available for maximum service and the number of vehicles operated in maximum service incre.ased 408 and 495 percent, respect ive l y, despite t he apparent decline in purchased motorbus service Please exp lain. 58 Purchased Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change Vehs. Avail, for Max. Service 26 132 407.7% Ve h s. Opcr. in Max ServiOO 21 125 495.2% System Response: MOTA attributed these increases to the provision of the fixed-route emergency trans portation services in Sout h Dade that were ini t i a ted to aid in lhe hurrican e recovery efforts. According to MOTA, this fixed-route service consisted of a circul ator -type of servi ce that required the use of a number of vehicles.

PAGE 84

lhpi d l{ail Que st ions I. As indicated in the t able o n the following p.1ge, passenger fare revenue incr<:ased more than seven percent be tween 1 991 and 1992 despite a s l ight declin e i n the number of passenger trips, resulting i n an increase in average fare per passenger trip frorn $0.93 to Sl.OJ. Is thi s the result of a f a r e increas.e (see a l so question #I o n t h e survey form), or is t here some othe r explanation? R api d R ail F Y 1991 FY 199 2 0.4 Change Passenger 13 ,906, 54 0 13 701 ,610 $% Passenger far e Revenue 1 Z 88$,010 13 ,830, 7 1 0 7.3% Ave rage Fa ( C $0.93 $ 1. 01 8 .9% Sys t e m Response: MOTA's last fare i1lcreas e occurred i n December 1990; however i n FY 1 992, i n order t o mor e accurate ly r eflecl l he use of plSses, t h e percentage of p asssale revenues allocated to rail increased from 36 percem to 48 percent This resulted i n an increase in passenger r evenu e b u t had no effect o n pussen ger rips. 2. Transportation oper a ting employees for this mode de creas ed from 102. 7 FTs in 1991 t o 91.6 F TEs in 1992 I n addi tion, administr4uive e m ployees decreased f rorn 91.1 FTEs in 199 1 to 73. 3 F Ts i n 1992. Please explain the dcdi nes i n these emp loyee categories System Response; ln FY 1992. FTA c hange
PAGE 85

Automated Guideway Ques t ions I The numbe r of passenger trips decreased a t a greater r ate from 1991 to 1992 than did the number of passenger miles (see lab1e on following page). Th is resulted in an increase in a\'erage t rip length. Is there an explanation for these t h anges? f Automated Gu ide way FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change P assenger Trips 3 ,22 9,030 2 682.460 -16 .9% Passenger M fle s 2,771 3$0 2 ,589.960 -6.6% I Averense from $41,355,330 in 1991 10 $95,653,530 in 1992. What capital purchases were made i n 1992? Response : rh e entire $95. 6 m i l l i on represents expendi t ures for the Metromover Extension project The projec t entered the construct i o n stage during fy 1991 with FY 1992 representing a full year of cons t ruction cos t s. Til e automa ted guideway vehicks were also p r ocured in FY 1992. 3. Passenge-r fare revenue decreased approximately 16 percent from $379,760 in 1991 to $320.280 in 1992. I s this dec line solely att ribut a ble 10 t h e decrease in r idership men tioned previously? System Respons.c: Acco r ding t O MOTA, 1 h e 16 percent decrease in passenger fare revenue is indeed consiste .nt with the 17 percent decline in unlinked passenger trips. 4, As indicated in the tab l e on the following page the tota l numbe r of em ployees decreased I 0 percent de. sp ite an increase in administrative employee FTEs. The d ecrease can be att ributed to a decline in maintenance emp l o y ee FTEs. Please c>e:plain these changes in t he employee categories. Automated Guideway FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change Operati n g E mp Joyees 1 0.0 1 0 .2 2 .0% Mainlenance Employees 68.1 S6. 3 .3% Administra t ive EmpSoyees 9 1 t2. 2 34.1 % iotal EmplOyees 87.2 78.7 .8% 60

PAGE 86

System Response: The decrease in maintenance employees is due to the high number of vacancies in the mover technicia n occupat ional clas sifications i n FY 1992. Recruitment for the .se classifications were made even mor e diffic u lt due to the necessity to keep positions vacMt for employees affected by the 13C Arbitration and a hiring freeze during a quarter of fY 1992. An add i t ional 5,000 hours were also charged to capital in FY 1992 for activ ities associated with construc tion of the Metromover Extension project. 5 The number of incidents increased from I in l991 to 8 in 1992. Given the unpredictabi lity of these events, are t h ere any possible reasons for t his incr<.>ase? System Response: The total number of incidents increas(.oQ in two categories : collis i ons with object s and personal casualties. The increase in collisions wit h objec t s is due to an incident in which a crane that was being used to constru c t a building adjacent to t he guideway fell and hit the guide, .. ny. The increase i1l personal casualties can be attribuled to increased emphasis o n more efficient reponing by security personnel. 61

PAGE 87

62 M E T RO D AD E TRANSIT A G ENCY SYSTEM TOTAL EXCLUDING PURCHASED MOTORB U S Performance Indicators Fig u re III A1 County/S ervice A rea Population (000) Figure Passenger Trips (000) 2.000 1 600 60 000 r r --r-I I ....... 80,000 1 .200 ---40,000 --800 ,._ r _J_ 1-f--400 0 0 -----19f4 1 9$$ Itt' ,,., IU& 1tl9 1tt0 1991 t'J'J l 191-4 1tSS 19U 1t$1 19ll 19U 1tt0 lt'H 1Ml Figure lli A3 Veh i cle M i les and Revenue Miles F igure III A4 Total Operating Exp ense Figure IIIAS Passenger Fare Revenues {000) l o.ooo'-I I 1 1 I .. I I = I .....,...... f I '-- 20.000 r---q ...... ---10,000 1-J J o I --,u. IUS ltU 1987 19U 19U 19 9 0 1991 1 n2 Figure III -A6 Total Employees 1 -m ..... b .. sao.ooo --'-= _11S40, 000 row Oc>to.,.,.l....,w(tOO.,I ') t) so ccJ=co_ ,,.., IUS nn 1U7 1U. 1Ut 1990 1 1 \9U v f-...1 .1 I I 800 r-1-I j_ 1 -2 000 600 1, 500 400 1,000 --soo I--200 0 1 0 $60,000 -l l::;c:: $40 .000 $20,000 --, .-J so 1984 \9tS 1 986 \917 19M ltn 1"0 19t1 1"2 Figure fii-A7 Veh icles in Ma ximum Servic e -. i - ----- Ollo' W -1----; 1-rr' 1914 IUS 1 U 1 917 1988 19!' 19t0 1991 1992 1914 IUS t9U 1917 19U ''" 1t90 1')91 tftl

PAGE 88

METRO-DADE TRANSIT AGENCY SYSTEM TOTAL EXCLUDING PURCHASED MOTORBUS Efftc:lheness Measures 20. 0 16.0 1 2.0 8.0 4.0 0 0 Figure lllA8 Vehicle Miles Per Capita .-1 b 1 ----ld=f-I-----11--" ,,.. 1985 ''" ,,.., ,,., ,,,0 ,,, 1 991 Fi9ure 111-A 10 Revenue Mile$ Betw een Accidents/Incidents 25,000 20 .000 15,000 10,000 S ,OOO 0 TIV E 1 . Ll?:'] .. 1 t.. t;()l t -! -, ,,.. 1 'J8S ''" 1 I f 1 19" 19U 1Ut 1990 I ')'H ' n Figure tiiA9 Passe nger Trips Per Rev e nue Mile :::. 1 l L lTOJ t.o1--l I I I I 1--l o.o 1-1-I I 1--l--1 I '"' uas un 1987 .. "" WJO '"' 1tn f i gure UIA11 Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls 2.500 I T TI" 1 500 =r1 -t -r-( ;II' .. -,:, o.f; : I I . 500 '"' 198S UU 1U7 IUt 1919 19'JO lUI 1991 63

PAGE 89

64 ( F i gure 111-A 12 Operati ng Expense Per capita s:::E I I L lJ_ I ILl $60.00 ,/ I I I I + OOM .. O ----0 0 0 $40.00 1 $20.00 ""'"' --1----f-+-.-$0. 0 0 tU t"$ t987 t tae 191t 1tt0 U91 t'IIU figure IIIA 15 Maintenance Expense Pe r Rev enue Mife S2.50n-S2.DOTI:::-1 .1 1 I l. I _ V "' I S1.sot%st.oo ] so.sou -. ... -... so.oo. ---------___ I 1!34 IUS IU' tU7 19U UU IUO 1911 1H1 Figu re IIIA18 Revenue Hours Per Employee '::rr L __ L [ l:::bl J ..f..-.L-V" -l 600 400 200 -0 1--1 n ns "" un 19-U nu '"o '"' '"2 METRO-DADE TRANSI T AGENCY SYSTEM TOTAL EXCLUDING PURCHASED MOTORBUS Erticiency Measures Figure IIIA 13 Operati ng Expense Per Passenger Trip $2.50 I I I J t I 1 V-. ----" -$2.00 S t .SO S1.00 so .so ---1 so.oo .'----1--,,.,. uas ''" "'' '"' ''" t n3 1ttl '"l 40% l 30% 20% 10% 0% Figure 111-A16 Farebox Recovery Ratio --------1--"" IUS If" 1U7 IUt 19&1 IUO I'Jtl t'JU 4 0,000 30,000 20.000 10,000 0 Figure 111-A19 Passenger Trips Per Emp lo yee L i l '1J . l I---I --1 ''" nn '"' n uaa nn tHO ''' '''1 Figure 111-A 14 Operating Expense Pe r Revenue Mile $6 .00 [Y $4.00 ---. -NOOO .. ... "' $2 .00 so.oo -I 19U IUS 1917 19U \9., 1990 199\ 1911: FigureiiiA17 Vehide Mile s Per Peak Vehide 60,000 ., '""""1 40,000 -' ::o.ooo 0 19$4 l'JU u" ,,., ttn UU tUO 1911 un $0.80 J $0.60 $0.40 L '" -$0.20 so.oo F i gure III A20 Average Fare J c ,,.. IUS 19.$' 1987 1914 19U 1n0 1"1 1"1

PAGE 90

METRO-DADE TRANS I T AGENCY SYSTEM TOTAL INCLUDING PURCHASED MOTORBUS f,erformance Indicators Figure IIIA21 County/Servi ce Area Population (000) I i I ;;;;;] 1,600 -1 -1,200 -, -800 400 --0 --uu ''as tn' ,,_., 19$8 uu '"o '"' '''l Figure 111-A23 Vehi,le Miles and Revenue Miles 40,000 30,000 I .............. --20,000 r 1 r:,..: I VoiQ Mt.t\ (000) ........... 10,000 I I 1\.::I_ I..:=t-J_I--1 o I I 1 1U.4 IUS ,,., 1U7 "" 19$9 U'JO ,,, UU $60,000 $40,000 520,000 so Figure IIIA25 Passenger Fare Revenues (ODD} [ [ T=:J . . ---.. -tn 19U t9U 19U 1tU "$'# 1990 l99t 1992 80,000 60 000 40,000 0 -f igure 111-A22 Passenger Trips (000) I ; .._j I -I-I I tnS 19U 1n1 19U tnt 1990 1191 I'JU Figure IIIA24 Total Operating Expense $160,000 r 1 1 . .1.-L. U . -"' $120.000 $80,000 -l ooe
PAGE 91

66 METRO-DADE TRANSIT AGENCY SYSTEM TOTAL IN CLUDING PURCHASED MOTORBUS Effectiveness Measures 2Q.O 16,0 12.0 8.0 4.0 Q.D figure 111--AlJ Vehicle MUes Per Capita -FH1-ttM ltU t)M ttl.l " .,_, ltN 1ttl 4.0 1.0 2 0 1 0 flgurciiiA28 Pauengtr Trips Per Revenue M ile -"-' 1---,,... ... "" ,,., 1988 "" 19to "" 19tl

PAGE 92

METRO -DADE TRANSIT AGENCY SYSTEM TOTAL INCLUDING PURCHASED MOTORBUS Efficiency Measur es S 100.00 sso.oo 560.00 S40.00 52;0.00 10.00 figu r e IIIA29 Operating hpenst Per Opita L ...... -r------t 914 1'NS 1!16 ttU ttll lUll tHO 1 99 1 tMl Figure III A31 Operating bpense Per Revenue Mlle $6.00 -/ "" S4.liO 12 00 so.oo .. . 19 tU1 ttU t t 11 14 tnt Uto U11 UU Flgu r o IIIA33 Vehide Miles Per Peak Vehicle 60,000 40,000 ------20.000 l_ tOll lM-1--.......wr ) ------0 t!S4 tM$ tftt. IMJ ''" tttt IMO '"' Ut) Figure 111-A30 Operating Ex.ptnse Per Passenge r Tr ip $2.50 12.00 S1.SO i J V-r 11.00 10 .50 10.00 ,... nn "" "'7 '"' ''" "" ,,.,, ,,l figure IIIAJ2 Farebox Re
PAGE 93

M 1>1' A SU MMA llY 68 A significant eve,nt thnt affecled MOT A during t he 1992 fisca l year was Hurricane Andrew which hh Dade County on Augus t 24, 1 992. The hurricane cttused service i nterrupti ons on all modes. Metrobus service was not eomplc1cly restored un1il September )rd Service on I he Mctrorail and Me.tromover modes WI$ not res1ored until AugUSt 31st In lixed-rout c and dema ndresponse emergency transportation services were i n iti ated i n Sooth Dade to aid in the recovery efforts. These were funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency SyMcm Total passcnscr t rips decreased from 73.415.300 lrifU in 1991 to 72,376.590 I r ips in 1992. Tit i s decline is prim01rily due to the effects of Hurricane Andrew. which caused serv i ce intenupt i ons on all of MOTA s modes. MDTA'< System T o t a l (exc l uding purchased motorbus) capita l expense increased 128 percent from $48,277,220 in 1991 t o $110 2 1 5, 1 00 in 1992. llle majority of this i n c r ease ca n be a ttribute d to the 13 I percent increase in automated g u ideway capi ta l expe n se from $41 ,3SS,330 in 1 99 1 to $ 95,653,5 30 in 1992. rne increase in capital expense for the a utoma t ed guideway mode resulted from a full year of constmctio n costs for the Metromovc:r Extension (entered construction stage durin3 FY 1991) and the procur ement o f additional automated guideway vehicles The number of roadcalls (for d i rectly operated motorbus onl y) incr=cd from 5.507 i n 1991 to 9,117 i n 1992, an increase of approximately 66 perce nt. MOTA states that th i s increase i s due to the use of a sign ifica.nl number of 1980-modcl buses w hich met fc:deraUy-approved retirement criteria I n MOTA also experienced an inuease in bus mechanic vacancies due to a hirin g freeze dur i ng a quarter of FY 1992.

PAGE 94

B. BROWARD TRANSIT DIVISION SYSTEM PROFILE Ort:anb.a tional Structure The Droward Cou nty Mass T ransit Division i s a division of t he Broward Count y P ubl ic Services Dep anmenl. GO't' trning Bodv and Composition Jlle Transit Division is governed by the Board of Coun t y Commissio ners for Broward Co u nty which is <::omprised of seven elected district representatives. S en:ice Area Tlte service are.a covered by t he sys t e m inclu des Broward County, Nonh Dade County (North Miami Beach. Carol City), and Sou1h Palm Beach County (Boca Rat on). Modes -The system c:urrentl y p rovides lixed-route motorbus service as w ell a s contracting for some services such as Tri-Rail Commute r Rai l feeder bus service, the Fort Lauderdal e Downtown Development Aut horit y downtown circ u l ator, and Coop e r City commun ily service. 69

PAGE 95

P ERFOR MANCE INDICATORS Service Popv lation (000} Setvic.e A r ea Size (square miles) Passen ger T tips ( 000 ) P assen ger M iles (000) Veh iCle M iles (000) Reve n ue Mi1es ( 000) V ehicle HoutS (000) Reve n ue Hours ( 000) Aoule Mnes Total Ope ratin g Expe nse (000) Ope r aling E xp ense (000 of 1 984 $) T otal Maintena nce Expense ( 000) Tota l Mainten a n ce Expense (00 0 o f 1 984 $) Total Capilal Expense (000) Total Loeat Revenue (000) Operating Reven v e (000) P as s enge r Fare R eve n ues ( 000) Tota l Emp loyees Transportation Operating EmplOyees Mainte nance E mplOyees Adm in istrative Empl oyees Vehicles Avail ab l e for Maximum Serv'.c:.e Veh i c les. in Maximum Secvioe Spare Ratio T otal Gallons Cons u med (000) 70 TABLE IJI -Bl Brow a r d T r ansit Divisio n Direc tlyOperated Motorbus Per forma n c e Indi cators 1987 1 988 1 989 1990 1,1 8 1.00 1.2 1 3.70 1.2<2.<5 1,255.49 n/a nta n/3 n / a 12 145 .90 13,797.65 1 4, 413 25 16 857 .21 61, 37 9 .10 75.026.46 67 ,5 89.57 81,061 69 9,584 .2 0 9 618 7 1 9 682.57 9,476.17 . 8 875 .80 8 9 1 0 75 8,973.21 8 7 4 6.36 658.40 638 .30 6<9 76 .. 684. 36 640. 7 0 611.93 638 70 663.84 567 90 609 .25 609 .2 5 609 .2 5 $27,261.40 $31, 9 43 00 $32,865.40 $34,360 65 .. $24,672.10 $27 868 32 $27,497 .46 $2 7 ,36 8 56 $6, 6 2 4 52 $7,028 35 $7,615 03 57, 456 .53 $$,99$ 32 $6,131.8 1 $6,371.26 $5 940.78 $6, 492.40 $7,066 .20 $3.945.51 $3 741.35 $25 171.31 $26,954.92 $ 29.534 20 $33 973 .27 $6,722 22 $ 7, 147 3 1 $ 6 ,533 3 1 $8.002 .79 $6,100 34 $ 5 .581.75 $5 751. 70 $7,603.56 622 80 623 .20 646 .60 645 .80 433 .40 4 40.10 4 48.10 452 40 146.90 143 60 154 60 1 48.40 42 .50 39. 50 43 90 223 .00 209 00 209 .00 202.00 ... 154.00 2 07.00 150.00 157 00 4 4 6 1 % 0 9 7 % 39.33% 28 66% 2 8<8 70 3 585 .10 2 8 87.20 2.972.90 199 1 1 992 %Change 1987-199 2 1,278 38 \ 1,337 00 1 3 .21% n/a 410 00 nta 1 9.108 .21 < 1 9 971.63 . 64.43% . 7 9 815 .51 96.255.55 56 82% 9 ,499.95 9 ,42 3.$2 .. .. 1 .67% .. .. ' . 8.774 .87 8,7 2 8 .14 1 .66% 717 58 ,. ': 656.09 -0.35% 686 1 7 629 55 .74 % 620 30 6 2 0.30 9 23% $35,990.15 $ 3 6.152 74 32.62% $ 2 7, 1 18.48 : ' .. $26,096.87 5.77% $8.395 72 $9 024.13 36 22% $6,326.16 $6 ,514 .07 8.65/o .. $9 675 54 $7 670 .15 18.14 % $33, 8 3 8 79 40 77% $8, 943 .5 8 $10.3 7 6.19 54.36% $8,816 76 $9.49 4. 97 55 65% 688.10 559.90 0 10% .. 465.90 378.80 1 2 .60% 152.20 133 00 -9 46% .. : .. 70.00 : ..... ,_,_ 48.10 1 88.00 189.00 .25% . 1 55.00 1 55.0 0 0.65% 2 1 .29% 21.94% nla .. 2 753.54 3 093 .3 5 8 59%

PAGE 96

PERFORMANCE I NDICATORS Servica Are3 Popubtlo n (000) ScN ice Area S ize (square miles) Passenge r Trips ,_ Passenger Miles ( 000) Ve hicle Miles (000) '" ' Revenue Miles (000) Vehicle Hour s (000) 1>:. Reve nue Ho urs (000) Ro u le Miles Total Ope r
PAGE 97

72 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Set\'ioe A rea Popu lation (000) Service A rea Size (squ a r e m iles) Passen get Trips (000) Passenger M ile s (000) Vehicle M iles (000) R eve n ue M ilos (000) Vehicle Hour> (000) R evenue Hour s (000) Roulc Miles TO(nga 1987-1992 <\ 1 3 :21% n/a I 410 .00 I n/a 1 < .. i 81,118.03 97, 622.37 59. 05% 9 ,865.37 : 9 890.91 '' ...... _,, .......... ,, .,,; 9, 1 20 85 9 134 27 2 91% 756.79 :; sS7.85 4 : 47% ; .... -.... 723 3 2 6 5 8.62 2.80% ,. " . > .. .. .. 724.80.. ',, 724 80 :i ' 27 63% 537,480 85 $37 481.20 s28,241.72:. $27 ,o5s.i2'. : p ; ... . .. ,._ . . ... _,_ n/a n ta n/a f\13; I ; n/a nla n/a" "< nlii < I n/a 37.49% '; nla nla n la n l a nla n/a I ' n/a. nla \:,. .: n /a n/a n/a n/o n/a n/a n/a I -1 n/o n/a I : .,. .. I nla nla nla 1 1 :;. nla n l a nla Ora 22 1 .00 2 1 3 .00 214 00 -4.04% t 'so.oo.: 1 1 7 6 .00 > ,. 17 4 .0611 .175.00 : 13:64%' .... '---.< "''":<:-:,_,.,._ .. ,,_.,_d 39.33% 2$.57% 22.41% 22.29% nla 3 585 .10 "' 2 887 20 '. ""' I I __ .., .... '' ., I ..... ... .,. ,;. '$ "-'ill' ., na .. ,,; u-:;1)8 ,,,1vllf a

PAGE 98

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY ,,., .. ,,.., Vehicle MileS Per C3pl t a . . ; -"' ... SERVICE CONSUMPTION "' .. ., Passenoe r Capita Passenger Trips Per Revenue Mile PassangBr T ;iPS Per RCvenuc HoU r . QUALITY OF SERVICE Average :' ,. Average Age of {in years) Num b e r of InCiden t s ... .. .. ... Total Roadcalls Revenue Miles Between lncid. ents (000) Revenue Miles Oetwee n Aoadc.tlls (000) AVAILABILITY "'. Revenue Miles Pee Routo Mi!e'(OOO) TABLE III -B4 Broward Transit Division Motorbus Effectiveness Measures 1987 1 988 1989 1990 (-' : 7 93 . > 8 12 7.79 7.55 > 10.28 11 37 11.60 13.4 3 1.37 1.55 1.61 1.93 16.96 22.55 22.57 25 39 13.85 14.56 14.05 13.18 6.40 6 80 7.1 1 7.97 564.00 465.00 456.00 689 00 5,049 .00 4 697 0 0 4 ,195.00 2 611.00 15 .74 18.37 19.59 12.69 1.76 1.8 2 2,14 3 35 15.63 14.63 14.73 14 38 1991 1992 1 987 2 I 7.43 7.05 I .15 % I 14 95 14.94 2.18 2 29 67.21% 27.85 31.72 67.34% 12.79 13 66 0.08% 6 57 6 .42 0 .31% 755 .00 695.00 23.23% 3 ,59 7 .00 2 .38 2.00 -52.62% 11.6 2 12 .5 6 0 .20% 2.4 4 3.66 106.44% 1 4.15 14. 07 -9 .97% 73

PAGE 99

EFFECTIVE N ESS M EASURES SER VIC E SVPPL Y Vehide Miles Per Capita SERV I C E C O NSUM PTI O N Passenger T rips PGr Capna Passenger Trips Per Revenue Mile P3ssen ge r T rips Per Revenu e Hour QUALITY OF S ERVICE Average Speed (R.MJR.H ) Average Age of Fleet {in years) Nu m be r o f Inciden t s Tota l Roadcalls Revenue Miles Between I ncid ents ( 000) Revenue Miles Setv.een Roa dcalls (000) AVAil.A6 1 L fTY Revenue Miles P er Route Mile ( 0 00) 74 TABLE JJI-BS Droward Transit Divi sio n Purc:ha$ed Motorbus Effectiveness Measures 1 987 1 988 1 989 1990 til a n/a n /a 0 .23 nla nta nta 0.19 nla n/3 nto 1 .18 n l o nla n/a 6 .71 nta nla n/ 3 5 66 n l a nla n/a n l a n l a n/a nl a .. 1 .0 0 n/3 nta nta n la n t a til a n/ a n/a nla nla til a n / a n/a nla n la 0.97 1991 1 9 92 %Ch-ange 199 0 1 992 0 .29 .:.0.35 51.99% -0 34 .. 0.43 129.34% .. 1.2 4 1 .43 20. 86% 1 1 55 :19.95 197 .34% 9.3 1 1 3 9 7 1 46.02% 8 23 8.36 n/ a .. til a ' n /a nta nla nta nl a n/a ... n/a nfa . . nla n/a n/a 3 .31 . 3.89

PAGE 100

EFFECTIVENESS M EASURES SERVICE SUPPLY Vehicle M ile s Per Cap i ta SERV I CE CONSUMPTION Tr\? s Per Capita Passe nger Trps Per Reven u e M i le PasSe n ger Trf>s P e r HOu r QUAL I TY O F SERV I C E Avera g e Speed Average Age of Fleet (in years) Numbe r of I ncid e nts Total RoadC311s Revenu e B etwe e n l nci:ients (000) Reven u e Between R oadca ll s ( 000 } AVAilABI LITY Reven u e MiteS Per Route Mile (000} ' TABLE lllB6 Broward Trans i t Division Sysfem Total Efrcclivcnes s Measures 1987 1 988 1989 1990 8 1 2 10 .28 1.37 18.95 13 .85 6.40 56<1.00 15 .74 1 .76 1 5 .63 7.93 11.37 1.55 22 .55 14.5 6 6 8 0 465. 0 0 4 897.00 18.37 1.82 14.63 7 .79 11.60 1.61 22.57 14 05 7 1 1 456.00 4,1 9 5.00 1 9.59 2 14 14.7 3 7.78 1 3. 6 2 1.91 24.A5 1 2 .80 nla 600.00 nla 12 .97 nla 10.96 1991 7.72 1 5 26 2.14 27.0 1 1 2.61 n la nla n la n/a nta 1 2.58 1992 7.40 15.37 2 25 31.20 13.87 nla nla nla n la n l a 1 2.60 %Ch ange 1987-1992 .8 4 % 49. 46% .... 2% 60. 60% 0.11% nla nla nla nla nla 9 37% 75

PAGE 101

76 EFFI C IENCY M EASURES COST EFF ICIENCY Operating Expense Per Ca p ita O p era t in g Expense P e r Peak Veh icl e (000) Oper at i ng Expens.e Pe r Passe n ger Tri p Operating Expen se Per PU$Onger Mile Operatk'lg Exponsa Per Revenue Mil e Operatin g E x p ense Per Revenu e Hour Mainte n a nce Expe n se Per Reve n ue Mi:e Maintena nce Exp Per Operating Exp. OPERAT I NG RATIOS Far ebox RtKOvery loeal Revenue Per Operating Exp4:lnse Operating Revenue Per Operating Expense V E H I C L E UTIL I ZATION Veh icle M i les Per Peak Vehido (000) Vehicfe Hours Per Pea k Vehicle (000) Revenue Miles Per Vehtcle Mites Reven u e Miles Per T o t a l Veh iCle s (000) Reven u e Ho urs Per T otal (000) LABOR PROOUCTMTY Revenu e Houfs Per Employee {000) Passenger Trips Per Employee (000) E NERGY UtiLIZA TION VehiCle Miles Per Ga ll on FARE Averag e Fare TABLE 111-87 Broward Transit Division DircctlyOperatcd Motorbus Efficiency Measures 1987 $23,08 $ 1 77.02 $2.24 $0.44 $3.07 $42,55 $0.75 24.30% 22.38% 92.33% 24.66% 62.2 4 4 .28 0 ,93 39.80 2 .87 1 .03 19 ,50 3.36 $0,50 1988 5 26. 32 $154,31 $ 2,32 S0.43 53.5 8 $52 .20 $0.79' 22.00% 17.47% 84.38% 22.38% 46,47 3 .08 0.93 42,64 2 .93 0 .98 22.14 2.68 $ 0 ,40 I 1989 $26.45 S 2 19 10 $2.2 8 $0.49 $3.66 $51.46 $0.85 23. 1 7 % 17.50% 89.86% 19.88% 64.55 4 .33 0 .93 4 2 .93 3.06 0.99 22.29 3 ,35 $0.40 1990 $27.37 ... .. $218.86 $2.04 $0,4 2 ' $3.93 $51.76 $0,85 21.71% '(, 22. 13% 98,87% 23. 29% 60,36 4 .36 0.92 43.30 ,, ; 3.29 ' 1.03 26.10 3 19 ', ' $0,45 ; 1991 $28.15 $232 .19 $1 .88 $0.45 1 992 $27,04 :}<1<'11<> .. ... "" $233 .24 $1.81' $0.38 "' .. $4 1 0"-'J ''-' ,,;," $4 'i4 1 .. ':1:-' $52.45 $0.96 23. 33% $57,43 .. 24.S6% 24.50%. 1 ' ' I 94.02% 24.85% I ' 98.01% 2a:mi ., .. :: 61 .2 9 60.80 .. --" 4.63 4 .23 0 ,92 ':' ., 0,93 46.67 I 46,18 I ). ::-: 'S . ... 3 .65 "> 3 .33' 1.00 I ':;; >' i 27.77 3.45 :--" ;; 35.67 -"), >.,J ;/, 3 ,05 so As'-' I T : ,. $o.48 %Change 198741992 17.14% 31 76% 19:3$% 5.44% 34.asciio"l. . _,,. 34,96% 38.53%' 2.72 % .,; . 1'/.:37%. 6.15% 16.39% ,31% 0 .99% 0 .01% , 1 6.03% 16:94 % v; 9 30%' I 82.90% .45%

PAGE 102

EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY '" . Operating Expens e Per C ap il.a Operatin g Expense P e r Peak Vehi c l e (000) Trip 1 Oporatlng Expense Per Mile Ope13t ing Per M il e O p e ratin g Expe nS6 Per Revenue Hou r < Exp e nse Per Revenue Mile Maintenanoe Exp. Per Operating Exp. OPERAT ING AA TIOS F a rebox R ecovery l ocal Revenue Per Opera t i n g Ex.pense Operating R c v o"!ue Per Opefating Expense VEHICLE UTILIZATION Vehicl e Miles Peak {00 0 ) Vehicle Hours Per Pea k Vehicl e (000} Reven u e Mi'.es Per Vehicle Mil es Revenue Ml1es Per Total Veh icles (000} Reven u e Hou rs Pe:r Total Veh icles (000} LAB O R PRODUCT IVITY Revenue Ho urs Per Employe e (000) Passenger Tri ps Pe r Employe e (00 0 } ENERGY UTILIZAT ION Vehide M ile$ Per Gall o n FARE Average F a re TABLE 111-B8 Broward Transit Division Purchased Motorbus Efficiency Measures 1987 n/a nta n/a n/a nta nlo n la nta n/s n/a nto nla nta nla nla nla n/a nla nta nla 1988 nla nlo n ta n /s n /a nta n/a n/a nto nta nlo nla 0/a n/a nta nla nla nla nla nla 1989 nta nla n/a n/a nta n/a n/a n/a nta "' n/a nla nl a nla o/a nlo n la n/a n ta n la 1990 $1 .09 $71.62 $5. 7 4 $1 .74 $6.7 9 $38. 55 n / a n /a nlo nlo n /a 15. 19 2 .23 0 .70 1 0.58 1.86 nta nla nla "' 1 9 91 $1.17 $78.46 $3.47 $ 1.14 $4.31 $40.13 n/a n/a "' n/a NO 19 .23 2 .06 0 .95 13 .8 4 1.49 n / a n/a nta n / a 1992 $0.99 $66.42 S2.29 $0. 9 7 $3.27 $45.69 n /a n /a n /a n /a n/s 23.35 1 .59 0.87 1 6 .25 1.16 nta ot a "' "' %Ch ange 1990 -1992 8 58% .51% -60.14% -44 .14% -!>1. 82% 18.53% "' n/a nta n/a N O 53.76% 28.92% 24.85% 53.58 % 3 7 .S8% n/a n/a nla nlo 77

PAGE 103

78 E FFIC I EN C Y MEASURES COS T E FF I C I ENCY Operati n g Expense Per Capi1n Operating Expense Per VehM;Ie (000) Operi\t ing E xpense Per Passen g e r Trip Ope r ati ng Exp ense Per Passenger M ile Operating Expense Per Reven u e Mile O p e r at in g Expe n se Per Revenue Hour Mainte n a nce Expense P e t M ile Main t e n a n ce Exp. Per Opcralin g Exp O PERATI NG RA T IOS Farebox Recovery l ocal Reve n u e Per Operati n g Expense Operatf.ng Revenue Per Operating Expense V E HIC L E U TI LIZAT ION V e h icle M ile s Per Peak Vehide (000) Vehi c l e Ho u rs Per Peak Vehk!le {000 ) R even u e M il es P e r Veh icle M iles Reven u e M ile s Per T o tal Vehicl es (000) Reven u e Ho u rs Per T o t a l Vehicles {000) lABOR PROOUC T I V I TY Revenu e tiours Per E m ployee {000 ) P a s se nger T rips Per E m p loyee (000) E N E RGY UTI L I ZATION Vehicle M ires Per Gal lon FARE A v erage Fa r e TABLE 111-89 Dro w:ud Transil Division Syslcm Total Efficiency Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 %Chango 1987 1992 ; $23.08 $177.G2 $2.24 $0.44 $3.07 $<2.55 $0.75 2 4 30% 22.38% 9 2 .33% 24.66% 62. 24 4 2 8 0 .93 39.80 2.87 1.03 19 .50 '3.36 : L-i, $0. 5 0 : 526. 3 2 $154 31 $ 2.32 $0.43 $3.58 $52.20 $0.79, 22.00% 17.47% . 84.38 % 22. 38% 45.47 3.08 0 .93 42.64 2.93 0.98 2 2 1 4 2.68 : $0.40 '< $26.45 $219 10 $2.28 $0.49 $3.66 $51.46 $0.85 23. 1 7% 17.50% 89.86% 19.88% 64.55 4 .33 0 .93 4 2 .93 3 .06 0 9 9 2 2.29 3 .35 $0.40 $28.46 $ 202.98 $ 2 .09 $29.32 $215.41 ... $1.92 ,.. < so.4 4 I $0.46 s3.99 1 $4 .11 I $51 .82 nla:..,,, riia I n/a n/a n/o n/a ''"' ., nlo nJa nla n/a $28.03 . $214.1 8 2 1 .45% 20.99% $1.82 I 18 .75% $0.38 -13 .56% $4.10 33.60% $56.91 33.75% "'-;:;:-nfa ;.. n / a n/a n/ a h/a nla n/a n/a nla n /a 55.48 4 .13 0.92 4 0.49 3 .16 '>_, 56.70 4 .35 0 .92 { / 56.52." 3 .93 9 18% 8 .06% .... -o.28% 7 .24% 7 1 2% ,_ < n/a n / a ......... -.., 42.82 "'3.40 n/a I 's} n/a 0 .92 42.68 3 :o8 n/o nlo nia nia '. ; n/a ,-<) ... j, n/a' -.'>-.-;;.. -. ,. I "* -<" ,.,nla4 -.,;-n/a '. .. '"'''.:.I";;-:nta' I J4 \ ,. ; .-<>-'{:t<:n/a

PAGE 104

CENERAL QUESTIONS I. Were any fare changes made duri 11g fiscal year 19 92? If so, please provide the previous fare struc t ure as well as the upda ted fare struc t ure and indicate when the changes were implemen ted. No changes were made. 2. Were there My significant changes in service/serv i ce area during fisca l year J 992? Several service changes occurred during the 1992 fiscal year A new regi onal mall i n the southwes t sect ion of Broward County opened and is served by two r outes. Additionally, ser vice to Sawgrass Mills Mnll was expanded and the m all is now served by t h ree routes. There was also expans i on of purc h ased tr:msportati o n systems n n d a greater emphasis on l ine h aul, grid service. 3. Have there been a ny recent changes or significant events that may help explain the performance of the t ransit system? Beginning Aug u s t 23, 1992, H u rricane Andrew caused a 3 5 -day serv i c e inrerrup1ion (parti a l serv ice on one day). 79

PAGE 105

QUESTIONS ABOUT I992 SECTION IS OAT A Direcuy Operated Motorbus Questions 1. As indicated in the tab l e bel ow, the number of passenger miles incr eased :u a g re ater ra te from l991to 1992 than did t he number o f passenger t rips, r esulting in an increase in ave.rage trip length. (s there an explanation for these changes? D irectly Operated Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 "/o Change Passenger Trips 1 9 ,108,210 19,97 1 ,630 4 .5% Passe n ger Miles 79,815, 5 1 0 96.255 ,550 20.6% Average T rip l e n gth 4.18 mi1es 4.82 miles 1&..4% Syste m Response : BROW analyzed this situation and suggested the following possibilities as contributing elements to the increase Several significant and more westerly destinations have been added and are now heavily served. resulting in some number of trips that are much longer. Many service changes in the past two yccars have had a "straightening .. effect on line-haul routes attrac ting r i ders with longer trips. TI1ese "straigh tened" route s take Jess time t han the previ ous routing, which is why these riders were attracted. Several communities now cont rac t cooperative minibus service with BROW. W it h this service, a community leases a I 5 pass enger vehicle for $ 1 per year and receives a small amount toward operat ing funds. The community operates this service, maintains the vehicle, a n d con1lects with BROW's system, allowing DROW to excise these loca l segments from its directlyoperated se -rvice. Since the excised segments fonncrly short loca l t rips, OR.OW's average trip l ength increased a s a result of the communities tak ing over these segments. 2 Maintcmmce e .xpense increased approximately 25 percent from $8,395,720 in 1991 to $10,492,660 i n 1992. Please explain thi s inc rease. System Response: Maintenance expense increased 25 percent from 1991 to 1992 be cause the fotlow i ng expenses were i n cluded: tire leasing engine J)UrclJases, and transmission p urc hases. These itcrns were purch ased with grant monies (BROW provided a n u pdated maint enance expense figure of $9,024> 1 3 I for FY 1992.) 3 Pleas e exp lain the decrease in capital expense from S9,6i5,540 in 199Ito $7,670,150 in 1992. In F Y 1991, BROW purchased a total of I6 new vehicles. Wha1 capita l purchases were made in 1992? 80 System Response: According to BROW, capital purchases in FY 1992 included six motorbuses and eight service vehicles. In FY 1991 there were numerous billings to the Federal Transit Administ ration for prior year expenses.

PAGE 106

4. Operating revenue increased l6 percent from $8,943,580 in 1991 tO $ 1 0 376,190 in 1992. Approximatel y half of this increase was d u e to an e ight percent increase i n passenger fhre revenue during t his time ($8,816,760 in 1991; $9,494,970 in 1 992). To what can the remainder of this. increase be anr ibuted? System Response. : Most of the remaining increase can be attributed to a significant decrease in loss on disposa l of assets. I n FY 1991 BROW had a $713,000 l oss on disposal of assets; however, only a $20)000 loss was experienced during the 1992 fiscal year. 5. The total number of employees decrease(( 19 percent due to dec-reasing employee FTEs in each of t h e three primary employee categories. Please explain the chnnges in each of the employee categories. ------OlreetlyOperate-d Motorbus FY 1 991 FY 1992 t. Chango Operating Employee s 465.9 378.8 -18 .7% Mainlenanc& Em p loyee$ 1 52.2 133.0 -12.6% Administrative. Emp loyees 70.0 48.1 31.3% Tot31 E mp5oyees 688. 1 559. 9 18.6% System Response: The categories for ope r ating, mintcnuncc, and administrati ve employees have decreased because the split of employees changed with Section IS requirements. All three categor ies were affected when BROW restructured its budget positions. 6. Total gallons consumed i n creased from 2,753,540 gallons in 199 1 t o 3,093,350 gallons in 1992 despite the relative stabi lity of t h e amount of direct l y operated motorbus service provided during t his time. Please explain th i s increase in f uel consumption. System Response: The 1992 fiscal year reflected the first full year with 67 coaches operating with Detroit D iesel DDE:C engines. The engines run much cleaner, but get lower miles per gallon (mpg) than B ROW' s older coaches. 1l1 e new coaches a r e avera&in& 2 .92 mpg, while t he fleet average is 3 07 mpg. 7. The-number of roadcaHs decreased from 3,597 in 1991 to 2,382 in 1992, a decl ine of approximat e l y 34 percent. To what can this significant reduction i n roadcaiJs be aur ibuted? System Response: UROW deployed two extra service tru cks during service hours. T his allowed for quicker response time, which re s ulted i n les s down time. In addition, older, less reliable coaches were removed from service. Purchased Motorbus-Questions I. TI1e m.nnber of passenger trips increased at a gre
PAGE 107

. ------------Purchased Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change Passenger Trips 429.000 $80.170 3$.2% Passe n ge r Mires 1. 366.820 4.9% Average Trip l e n g t h 3.04 m iles 2.36 miles .4% Syslcm Rc5pons c: As discussed previou sly, with severn! communities cont r acting cooperalive min i -bus service with BROW, many purchased transpor1alion trips ::arc now t he rcst dt of inc reased passeng c r activity o n routes designed t o cap t ure short local t r ips. BROW expcc.ts additional declines in thi s measur e in F'Y 1993. 2. As indicated i n the tabl e below, the number of vehicle miles and revenue miles inc reased between 1991 and 1992; however, the number of vehicle hours and re\'enue hours declined. Titese changes resulted in a significan t increase in average speed (revenue miles per revenue hour). Is there an exp lanalio n ror these changes? Purch.ased Motorbus FY 1 991 FY 1992 % Ch;tnge Vehic l e Mi1Cs 467,130 27.8% Revenue Miles 345,980 406 200 1 7.4% Ve h icle Hou rs 39, 2 \ 0 31.770 19.0% Reven u e H o urs 3 7 1$0 29.000 21.7% I Average S p eed 9 .31 mph 1 3 9 7 mph 50.0% System Respo n se: Pu r chased tra n sportation serv i ce in FY 1991 was primm i l y composed ofTri Rail feeder bus setvice The feeder buses rn n fixed rou tes, then waited (in service) for the next run. resulting in very slow average speeds. P urchased t ransportatio n service in FY 1992 was composed much more of continuous l y run n in g service, tes uhing i n faster average speeds 3. T o tal operating expense de-Greased from $ 1 ,490,700 i n 199 1 to $1,328,470 in 199 2 despite the provisio n of more service m i les and an addit i on al vehicl e operated i n maximum service Please exp l ain how the cost savings were a c hieved. 82 System Response: According t o BROW, cost savings were d u e to expe n se reductions for Orayline (T r i-Rail feeder) service . Most oth er pllfchascd t r ansportation operationa l expenses are the respo n sibility of the contractor who operates the serv ice (BROW cont ributes an average o f S I 8 ,000 per bus for all o t her purchased transportati on operationaJ exp enses).

PAGE 108

10,000 8.000 6 ,000 4 ,000 2,000 0 BROWARD TRA N S I T DIV I SION Figure County/Serv ice Area {000) ::::: l ! I I I I I I 1-1 0 ttt -j-t-3j 300 ----1-1----_ t 'J8S U86 ,81 t,. IS8'J ,,,0 '"' 1991 F igure 111 Veh i cle Mile s and Revenue Miles c .. ' k.f:. ---------- ----- ---I --$10,000 1 --__ J J = I -SO Performance lndic.ators Figure 111 Passenger Trips (000) ' 1o.ooo I I I I I t-1 I s .ooo I I J--1 1-H- o-1--1 L tU4 1tlS 1 1'811 tt sto .ooo F i gure IIIBS Passenger Fare Revenues {000) 1U5 1 9M 1n1 19U l'J8'J 1t90 1'J? 1 1 2 ln.l 19lS 19't6 1987 l U "" 199 0 1991 lttl 800 600 400 200 0 -... f i gure 11186 Total E mployees I L T -7 .. j-. -'----L ( hQi t : loel>Joo .. .,.,toH-<1: "'"'" ) r=l ;-== --, -19S' 1915 191$ ISU 1?&$ ''*' 1 990 1 1 1M2 f i gu re 111 Vehicles in Maximum servic e 2oo-I i__l I I -l-b. T 'f\[:.1 i. I ,,.. ____ .. (r-1 150 100 .. -50 0 l!M 19lS l'Jt& tHJ 198$ t'JU 1 'J10 19?1 ,,,2 83

PAGE 109

84 BR O WARD TRAN SIT DIVIS ION 10.0 8 0 6.0 4.0 2 0 0 0 Figure 11188 Vehicle Miles Per Capita ------1 19$4 InS nU 19f) 19U 19U 1t90 1991 199t 3.0 6 0 4,0 2 0 0 0 Effectiveness Measures Figure Ag e of F lee t (ye ars} IJfHf I'\ F igure 111 Pas senger Trips Per Revenue Mile 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 o.s 0 0 "" 1ns '"6 "" '"' nu '"o " nn -----. .... ...... ---) ( NOI1 : ,,, '"1 nu '"' nn "" nto "" 1n2 f igure 111811 Revenue Mil e s Between Accidents/Inci dents Figure 111 812 Revenue Miles Between Roa d
PAGE 110

530 00 520 00 510 00 $0.00 Figure 111813 Operating Exp ense Per Cap ita r-' v ? . -19SA ltlS 191& " UU. 19$9 lHO 1991 t9n Figure 111-816 Maintenance Ex_pense Per Revenue Mile $ 1. 20 $0.90 El+IJ: --,o ...... i --1 I $0.60 $0.30 .. 50. 00 (._ f..w;,st .. ; I 19 tstS "'' 1"1 UU 19119 ''90 1991 F i gure 111 Revenue Hours Per Employee J o 1/1 900 i .. -" I I 1 --j ---1 600 300 ( I>Qlf: ) i 0 tSS4 11U nu. lttr 1tU 1?8? 1"0 1 un BROWARD TRANSIT DIV I SION Efficiency Measure s Figure 111-814 Operating Expense Per Passenger Trip S2.5 0 ...... J I 52.00 S 1 .SO $1 .00 I '_. so. so f-50.00 --1 1 ?8S tU7 1988 1!1$9 19?0 '"1 1902 lOll 101& Figura 111 Farebox Recovery Ratio 1-1-1-1-1 1-+-( 1;011 ') l==l=i=t= I 1 tth 1 ?85 1914 1U1 HIU 1989 U')O tttt 40,000 30,000 Figure 111 -820 Passenger Trips Per Employee ------20,000 10,00 0 -0 ( t .Otf ) r I 19f4 IUS 19f6 1917 19811 "" 1910 1991 l992 fl t .. 52.00 $1.00 -l _ .J 50.00 19$4; 19$$ ''" " .. ,,0 "" ,,1 F igure 111 Vehicle Miles Per Peak Vehicle 80,000 Ill -r --1 1\ l/' ... I I_ ---60,000 40,000 20,000 1--_ .. --1 0 .. -i 1$84 ,,as 1f86 1,., nu 1nt '"o 15')1 ,,, Figure 111821 Average Fare 50 .60l --r-r r-I S0.40 -1 I $0.20 '-' '-:j __ u _.--/i()ff 1-t .. IJ'>o>NII-I>"'d" ) so.o o l , F==t==-! ,-1 \U4 lUG 1981 19U 19U 1990 1991 "'l 85

PAGE 111

BROW SUMMARY 86 System Total passenger miles i nc reased more than 20 percent from 81,118,030 in 1991 t o 97,622,370 in 1992 despite only a five percent increase in passe n ger trips during t h is time. The majority of this i ncre as e is due to a 21 percent increase i n directlyopcra ted motorbus passenger miles (79,815,510 in 1991. : 96.255,550 in 1992). BROW indic-ates that a number of service changes and route modifica tions in t he pas t two years have helped increase average t rip lengths. Also, BROW now contrac t s cooperat ive mini-bus service wit h several commu nities thereby allowin g BROW to excise these loca1 segments from its directly -operated service. Total capita l expense decreased from $9,675,540 in 1 99 1 to $7,670,150 i n 1 992, a decline of nearly 21 percent. Accord ing to BROW, this decrease w as due to fewer vehicles being pur ch a sed during t he 1992 fiscal year an d t o the numerous b i lli n gs to the Federal Transit Administration during FY 1991 for prio r year expense s To t al opcre.d 16 percent f rom $8,943,580 in 1991 to $ 10.376,190 in 1992. T his incrc.1se can be attr ibuted to a n eight percent inc rease i n passenger fare reven ue (S8 816,760 in 1991; $9,494,970 i n 1 992) and a significant decre-ase i n loss on disposal of assets during this t ime. Thenumber of roadca11s (dircctly o p erated motorbus only) decr eased a p proximate l y 34 percent from 3,597 roadcalls in 1991 to 2 ,382 roadc
PAGE 112

( C JACKSONV I LLE TRANSIT AUTHORITY SYSTEM PROFILE OaanJutlonal Srructure Jackson ville Transportation Authority is an i ndtpendent authority Co\'crujng Uody :md Comnosition The Authority is governed b y a Board of Directo r s comprised or seven mtrnbcrs.: three a re a ppointed by the Govemor of Florida; t hree ore appointed by t he Mayor or Jacksonville; and t h e Flor ida Depnrtmem of Transpo rtatio n R egion Sec retary is automaticaJJy appoi1ned. Servic e Area T h e Jacksonville system provides t r:msporta tion se rvices in Duval County. Mods .. D i rccclyopcmtcd modes include motorbus servlcl! and autom;ucd guidt\\' ilY s<:rvicc (the Cirst phose or 1he Automated Skyway Express bccmm: opccationol in June 1989). The second phase of the guideway sys tem is sc heduled for comple tion i n l995. In a dditi on, JXTA also contracts out IOrder m m drcspo n se servicc:s. 87

PAGE 113

PER F OR M ANCE INDICATORS Servi ce Alta Popui;Uion (000) Setvtce Alea Site ( sq ua r e milts) Passenger Trips (000) Passenget Miles (000) Ve hieiO Miles (000) .. Revenue Mres (000) V e hi c l e Hours ( 000) Revenuo Hoof s (000) Route Mi les To1a1 Ope rating Expenw {COO) Total Operatin g Expense (000 of 1984 $) i olal Maintenance Elcpense (000) Tot a l Main1enance Expen$0 {t:oo of 1984 $) Total C:tpit a l ExpeMe { 000) Tolattocal Revenue {000) Ope rati n g Revenue (000) Passenger faro Revenues (000) T otaJ Emp loyees Tr3nspot1ation Operating Employee-s Mai ntena n ce Emp1oytit.s Admi n i $ trative Employees Vehi c les A v a i l ab l e for t-.'.alc:imum S ervice Vehicl u Operated i n Maxim u m Service Spare Aalio Total GalloM Cc:ln$vmed (000) Total E nergy Coo$ume d (000 o t kw -hOurs) 88 TAB LEIII-CI Jacksonville T r ansportation Authority Dir:tly-Opcratcd Motorbus Perfonnancc Indicators 1987 1988 1989 1990 664 .10 617 .00. 686.34 672.97 n(a .,. n(a 6 501.50 8,036 .92 $,012 .90 1,: 44,339 .78 4 1 ,916.10 46, 8< 6 .67 4 5 ,051.00 5 ,756.10 6,056 .62 6 124 .00 6.148 .00 5 6 7 0.30 5 752.71 5,782.2 1 5 812.91 439.40 443.80 41$ 21 427.13 421.90 422.50 412 0 5 4 1 5.45 1, U7.60 U 7.60 1 ,163 .00 1 ,163.00 $14.289 .90 $ 1 4,642.50 $16,063 71 $15, 899.54 $12, 932.64 $12 774 .69' .. $13,440 .00 $13,4 .60.63: .. < $3,315 .26 $3,376 .97 $3.860 53 $4,137.2 1 $3,000.37 $2,946 ,20 $3,229 .99 $3, 295.33 $10,642.40 $16,821.26 .,. n(a $12,060.08 $12.751.95 n(a n{a $5,24 4.15 $ 4 ,1)29. 75 n(a n{a $4,788 .78 $4 409 .32 $4,328.5 1 $4, 502 .38 368 .90 390 .60 402.60 396.70 247.70 268.2.0 275.80 272.90 64.90 85,00 85.70 87.00 36.30 37.40 "''41. 1 0 ,_ 36.80. 173.00 170.00 172 .00 170.00 165.00 1 38 .00 138 .00 132.00 4.85% 23 .f9% 24.64% 28. 79% 1,560 .60 1 617 1 2 1,700 .58 1,740 .70 ,. n{a n(a n{a 1 9 9 1 1992 1987-1 2 i i 693.55 .. 681.63 4.4 3% n(a 640.00 n(a 9,403.99 -< '*>9,685 12 -';c.:';' ,,,., \2.75$ .. 45, 49 4 .35 46. 696 .94 5 32% 6,096.5'1 ;-, ... < '" 6 ; 444.46 w., ' 11.96% < 5,90 2 .68 6.321 16 11.48% ,. -: -434.46 .: ->Y 4!)6 .73 ' 421. 61 443.97 5 23% ., .. 1 163.00 I, 163 .00 4 .06% $19,007.52 $19 315.56 35.t7% : .. $ 1 3,942 .94' ,J 1 4,322 .11, 7.81% .... ...... -.. ' ,_, $4.7 1 9 .92 $4,632.98 39. 75% . $3,556.45 $3,344.32 11.46 ... .. ,.., nfa $2, 187 .96 .44% .,. __ ;-"'_ n/a ,, ,.... '" -,n{a I .,. n{a $4, 4'72.47 $4,454.45 423.20 435 50 .... -.. 286.30 294 .00 18.69% 99.2.0 1 02. 1 0 20. 26% '1 <;; 37.70" 39.40 ;: 8.54% tSJ .OO 160.00 7.51% 133.00 ';; .. ": 134.00 .. .. '" lS . < 1 ,966.30 .. 26.001i)" nfa n{a nfa

PAGE 114

PERFORMANCE lNDICATORS Sel\'lee Artt Popula.tion {000) Strvic. Area Size miles) Panenger Ttlps (000) Pa11enger M iles (000) Vohlcro M ilos (000) f levtnuo Mlos (000) Vthlcft Houts (000 ) Revenue Hours (000) Routt Mites Total Operating &pen$e (000) Tow ()pera>ng Exp of 1984 $) Total C.pil. al Expense f;lOO) Total t.ocJI Revenue (000) Opttatlng Aevenuo (000) Pasung,er Fare Revenu$S (000) Tota l Employees Transport:t11o.n Operaling EmplOyees M a l n tonance Employees Administrat ive Employee$ Vthlclos Available for Maxi m u m Service Vehicles In Maximum Service $pill Ratl.a Tot.IJ Gallons Consumed (000) TotaJ Enttgy Consumed p)) of tw-howt) TABLEill-C2 Ja
PAGE 115

P E RFORMANCE IND I CATORS Service Are Popu lation ( 000) $efVice Area Si-ze ( square m ites ) Pas.senger Tri ps (000) Passenge r Miles (bOO) Ve hicl e Milea (000) Rcvenve Mil es (000) Vehicle Hour s (000) Revenu e Hours (000) P.oute Miles To1a1 Oper ali n g Expense (bOO) Tota l Ope r aling Expen$e { 000 of 19&4 $ ) T o ta l Mai n tenance Expen&e (000) Tota l Mai n tenance Ex.pe n s e (000 of 19$4 $) T otal Capita l Expe nse (000) Tot a l Local Revenue (000 ) O pera:in g Reven u e (COO) Passenger Fare Revenues (000) Total Em ployees Tum s port a tion Op erat i ng Employees Mai n tenance Emp l oyees Admi n i strative Emp l oyees Ve h i cles A v ailable l o t Maximum Service Vehi c l es Ope r at e d i n Maxtmum Servlee Spa r e Ratio T otal Gallons CoMumed ( 000) T o t a l Ene rgy Con$"Ume d (O(X) of kwh ou rs) 90 TABLEffi -C3 Jac ksonville rransportation Authority System Total Performan c e Indicators 1987 1988 1989 1990 664. 1 0 677.00 686.34 672. 97 nja nja n f a n f a 8,1
PAGE 116

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY Vehic le M iles Pe-t C&pila S E R V ICE CONSUMPTION l)lps Per ". Pass en ger Trips Per Rev e nue Mile Trips Per Revenue Hou r OUAUTY O F SERVI C E A'Otage Speed (R.M. /R.H ) A11erage Ago of A1let \in years) Numbe r of In cidents Total Roadcall s MUei B e t .... een incidents (000) Revenue M iles Betwee n P.oadcalls (000) AVAILABILITY . Revenue Miles Pet Rou1e Mile (000) ---------TABLEIU-C4 J acksonville Transportat ion Authority M otorbus Effectiveness Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 8 67 8.95 8 .92 9 14 12.80 11.87 11.&7 1 3-08 1.50 1.40 1 .39 1. 5 1 20. 1 5 19.02 19.45 21. 19 13 .44 13.62 .. 14.03 13 .99 6 .7 0 7 .50 7.6"3 7.16 183.00 169.00 158.00 57.00 1 3-41.00 1 252.00 1,795 .00 1 ,807 .00 ... 30.99 34.04 36.50 101.98 23 4 .59 3.22 3.22 5 .07 5 1 5 4.97 5 .00 ----1 991 1992 %Chango 1987 1992 8 9 4 9 .29 7 .21% 1 3 .00 1 3 .82 7.9&'l< 1.59 1 5 2 1.14 % 22.30 21.59 7.14'J. 14.00 1 4 .24 5.9 4% 6 23 7.18 7.16% 97.()() 85.00 -53.55' 1,590.00 1 26<.00 5 74"4 60.S5 74.37 140. 0 1 % 3 7 1 5 .00 18. 27 % 5 .08 5.44 7 13% 9 1

PAGE 117

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPI. Y Vehicle Mites Per Capila SERVICE CONSUMPTION Passenger Trips Per Capita Passenger Trips Per Aeven u e M i le Pas.se nger Trips Per Revenue Hour QUALITY O F SERVICE AWll398 Speoa (R.M./RH. ) Average Age o f Aeet fin years) Number of lnc::ide nts Total Revenu e Miles Between lneidenls {000} Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls (000) AVAILABilllY Acvcnve Milts Per Roule Mile (0((1) .. --------92 TABLEUI-CS Jacksonville Transportation Authority Automated Guideway Effectiveness Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 nfa nfa 0.04 0 .11 nfa n f a 0. 1 8 0.60 nfa nfa 4 .91 5.80 nf .,. 85.28 89. 2 7 nfa nfa 17.39 15AO nja nja o .oo 1.00 nja nfa 6.00 1.00 n/a n fa 0 .00 o .oo nfa nja 4.20 70.18 nfa n/a nfa nfa n fa nfa 18.0 1 50.13 1991 1992 %Change 0 .10 0 .11 188.95'% 0.45 :_ 0 4 1 ., 1 26.59% 4.43 3 .84 .66"4 58.53 .';; .. ;>.. 53.79 ''-.36. 93% -13.20 14.00 .49'X. 2 .00 3 .00 nfa n f a 0 .00 nja 8 .00 o.oo nja nfa I -" .. n f a ._. nja .. ,;-8 61 n {a nfa 49. 19 6 1.40 240 98%

PAGE 118

EFFECT IVE NESS MEASURES S ERVI CE S U PPLY Veh i cle Mile S P e r Capita SERV I C E CONSUMPTION Pass e n ger Tfips PC{ P3$SCnger Trip s Per Aevenve Mile Passenger T rips P e r R 8venue Hour QUALITY O F SERVI CE Aerage Speed (R.M. /A.H ) A.,.erage Age of Aeet (i n years) N umber of I n cidents Total Roadcalls Revonu o M d iC$ BcUwoon lnidonts (000) R e ve n ue Between Aoadcalls (000) AVAILABILITY Rovenve Miles Per A cMe Mile (000} TABLEI11-C6 Jacksonville Tra:n.s-portacion Authority System Total Effectiveness Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 8 .67 8 .95 8.96 9.2 4 1 2 .80 11.87 1 1.86 13.69 1.50 1 .40 l A O 1.57 20.15 1 9 02 19.68 2 1 .93 13.44 13.62 14.04 14.0 1 6.70 7.50 .,. nfa 183..00 169.00 IS..OO 58.00 1, 341 .00 1 ,252.00 1 .7 95.00 1,807 .00 30.99 34 .0<1 3S.4l 101.43 4.23 4.59 3 .24 3 .26 5.07 5.15 4 9!__ 5 .05 -----1 991 1992 1987 2 I 9.05 9.40 8 .4 4 % 14.24 14 23 1 1 15% 1.63 1 .54 2 .92% 22.75 21.97 9 0 1 % ; 13.99 14. 23 5 .92% n f a .,. nja nfa 85.00 -53.55% : 1 598 .00 1 264.00 -5 .74% nfa 75.23 3.7<4 5.05 s 13 5.49 8.26% 93

PAGE 119

94 E FFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Opera.liog Expense. Per Capita Operating E>cpe nse Pe r Peak Vchtele (000) Operating Exp e nse Per Pas$Coger Trip O perat i n g Exp e nse Pe r Passenger Mite Operating Expense Per Revenue Mil e Operating E,x.pense Per Revenue Hour Mai n t enance Expense Per Reve nue MiSe f.ltp Per Operating Exp. OPERATING RATIOS Fa uJbOK Recovery toea! Revenue Per Operating Expe nse Ope r ating Revenue Per Operating Elcponso VEHICLE UTILIZATION VeMcl e M i tes Per Peak Vehicl e {000} Vehicle Ho u r s Per Peak Vol'l ieJo (000) Flcvcnue Miles Per Veh icle Mi les Revenue Miles P e r T o tal Veh i cles {COO) Reven u e H ou r s Per Total Vehic l es (000) LABOR PRODU CTIVITY Revenue Hour'S Per (000} Pass en.ger Trip$ Per Emp l oyee (000) ENERGY UTILIZATI ON Vehic l e Milos Pet Gallo n Vehicle Mi l es P e t Kilowatt-Hr FARE Ave r age Fare TABLEill-C7 Jacksonville Transportation Authority Directly-Operated Motorbus Elficicncy Measures 1987 $21 .52 $8MI $1.68 $0.32 $2.52 $33.87 $().$8 23. 20% 33.51% 84.40'% 30.70% 34.89 2 .66 0 99 32.78 2 .4 4 1 .14 23 .05 3.69 .,. so.so 198 8 $21 .63 $ 106.11 " $1.82 $0.35 $2.55 534 .66 $0 .59 23.06% 30.1)% 87.09% 3 1 .62 .. 43.89 3 .22 0.95 33.84 2.49 .. 1.08 20.58 3 .75 n/a 1989 $23.40 $116.40 $2.00 $0.34 $2.78 $36. 98 $().67 26,95% I n/a 44.38 3 .02 0.94 33.62 2..40 1.02 19. 90 3 .60 .,. .v so.ss I $0.s< 191l0 $25.11 $12M3 $1.92 $0.38 $2 .91 $40-68 $() .71 24.48% 26.64% .. .. .,. nja ,.-.<-; 48.s8 1:. 3 .24 0 95 34 .19 2.44 1 .05 .,_ _, 22.19 3.53 n/a $().51 t99t $27.89 $142.91 $2.02. $().42 $3.22 $45.08 $0.80 24. 83% 23.53 .. .,. n/a 45.84 3 27 0.'0 38. 58 2 76 2 2 .22 3 .27 nfa $0.48 1992 $27.85 $144.15 .., --,.- $2.02, "' . :.-I $().41 .... $3.06 $43.51 ...... sg.73 23.99'1> ., n/a ... .,. -' 48.09 . 3.41 0.98 39. 5 1 2 .77 ,$ 1.02 22.01 ., 3 .28 nta $() .46 %Change \987 29.43% 66.44% 19. aii% 28.35% 28.45% ... 25. 36'll1> 3.39 .. .<:-' nfa n/a n/a < ; 2 7 .99% .43% Z0.54% 1:i.18% < 1 9 .86% 4 .50% .14" I 7 .6()%

PAGE 120

EFF ICIEN C Y MEASURES COS T E FFIQ ENCY Ope r at ing Expense Pe r Operating Expense Per Peak Veh ic l e (000) Oporati ng Expense Per Pa$.$enger Trip Operating Expense Pe r Passenger Mll e Operating Expense P e r R cvcnuo Milo Operating Expens e Per R evenue Hour M;;tint enance Expense Per Revenu e M ile Mai n le nancc Exp. P e r Operating Exp OPERATING RATIOS Farebox Recovery Loca l Revenue Per Operat ing Expens e Operating: Revenue Por Oper ttting Expense VEHI C L E UTILIZATION Vehicle M iles Per Peak Vehide (000) Vehicle Hours Ptt Pt3k Veh iCl e (()00) Reven ue Miles Per Vehicle Miles Revenue Milts Per To ta l Ve hicles (000) Revenue Hour s P e r Tota l Ve hicles (000) LA80R PRODUCTI VITY Reve n u e Houf:S Empl
PAGE 121

EFFICIE N C Y MEASU RES COST E F FICIENCY Ope r ating E.x.p-tn$0 Per Capi ta Oper3ting Expense Per Peak Vehide (000) O)>erating Expense Per Passen ge r Trip Op e rat i n g EMpen s e P e r Passenger M it e Oper
PAGE 122

CENERAL QUESTION S L Were any fare changes nmde during fiscal year 1992? I f so, p lease provide the prev ious fare str u cture as well as the updated fore structure and indicate when the c hanges were: implemented No changes were made.. 2 Were 1here any signifitant chang.es in service/service area during fiscal year 1992? None. 3. Hrwe t he r e been recent c lum&cs o r sign i fic a n t events t hnt mny hel p exp lai n t h e perf omwncc of t he tmnsit system'! None. 97

PAGE 123

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTION IS DATA Directly -Operated Motorbus Que s tions I The number of incidents decreased from 97 in J 991 to 85 in 1992. Given lhe unpredic tab i lity of these events. are t here any pOSSible reasons for this decline? System Response: Accor ding 10 JXTA, no explanation cou l d be identified for t his decl ine other tha n good fortune . 2 The number of r oa d calls decreased from 1,590 in 1991 to 1,264 in 1992, a decline of approximately 21 p e r cent. To what can thi s significant reduction be attributed? S y stem R esponse : The reduction in the number of road call s caJl be auributc d to the continuing success of JXTA 's exte n sive preve ntive mai n t enance program that was ini t iated during FY 1991. Automated Guideway Questions 1 A s indicated in the table below. the numbe r of passenger miles decreased at a greater rat e from I 991 t o 1992 than did t he number of passenger trips res u lting in a decrease in average trip length Ts there an explanation for these <:hangcs? Automated Guideway FY 1991 FY 1992 %Ch-ange Pas.s.enger T rip$ 30$,300 283, 130 -7.3% I P3sse nger Miles 213,710 1 63,850 3.3% I Average Trip LGngl h 0.70 miles 0.58 mi1es 1 7 3% System Rc:sponsc: Previously t h e lengt h of the guideway was st a ted to be 0. 7 m ile one way and t h i s fig u r e was accepted and used through FY 1991. After extensive monitor ing of the vehi cle hub odomcters, JXTA dctennincd that the actual dis tance t rave led by thevehicle for a round trip was 1 .192 miles. hence, the rcsulring decline in average trip length. 2 The number of direct io nal route m iles decreased from 1.4 miles i n 1991 to 1.2 miles in 1992. Please explain this change i n rou te mil e a ge System Response: See response to question If. I 3. Tota l operat i ng expense increased significantly from $508,530 in 1991 t o S609,900 in 1 992. Part of this i nc r e ase was due to an inc,rtase in maintenance expense from $228,540 in 1991 to $270,090 i n 1992. P lea se explain the incr ease in mai ntenance expense as well as the remaining increase in opera ting expense. 98

PAGE 124

System Response: The Skyway is no longer in warranty and many of the repairs that wer e previously done und e r warranty are now cost items. A lso, as t he system ages and more m i leage is recorded on the vehicles. bot h the sche .duled a n d unscheduled maintenance becomes more compre-hensive a n d costly. 4. Please explain the incre
PAGE 126

JACKSONVILLE TRA N SPORTATION AU T HO R ITY 10. 0 ........ 8.0 6 0 4,0 2 0 o.o 'Figure IIICB Vehi cle M i les Per Cap ita I I -. -----I -''*" uas ''*' ,,., "" ''" '"o ,,, , 2 E ffectiveness Measures Figure III-C10 Average Age of F leet (years) F i g u re i ii-C9 Pa ssenger Trips Per Revenue Mile :::m:LI Q 1 2 0 8 -0 4 ; 0 0 1---1954 tns nu "'' "" ' '"o "" 1!92 1:::f1lB;rn 4 0 t---t-2 0 --.... ) --0 0 ;-o---.-t--r 19lS IU6 1n1 tnl l9t9 IMO 1991 1 ,_,1 Figure III C11 Revenue M iles BetweQn Acd dent!./lnddents F igure IIIC12 Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls 120.000 -6 ,000 9 0.000 -----/1\ -1 / -V-6<),000 \ v ) ' \ ....... __ __ ---4 ,000 2,000 30.000 ---( HOl t =F=F=:=:-0 0 "" tsas "" n n a u ,_,, ""' '"' ''n 1914 tns "" " "" nn a90 '"' t 991 I 0 I

PAGE 127

102 J A CKSO NVI LL E TRA N SPO RTA T I O N AUTH O R I T Y f i gure III C13 Operating Expense Per Cap ita $30.00 f-""'. r $10 0 0 j_ I I 510.00 so.oo U U 19U lUI; t 'J87 au "" 1t9Q 1 991 1 992 Figure III-C16 M aintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile $1.00 $0.80 I [ + --"' f""' I 1 1 -. --]-_: ... -' $0. 6 0 $0.40 S0 .20 $0.00 '" ""' ''u ''n 1917 ,,.. an 1t1o ,,, 1 1,200 900 60 0 3 0 0 0 Figure III C19 Revenue Hours Per Emp loyee I I I I t ---1--I .,,. lUS nn nn 19n au 19911 tttt ,,n Efficiency Measures Figure III C14 Operating Expens e Per Passenger Tr i p $2.500-r--;r--r-r-;r--r-r--, $2.00 su L ... J .. .,t-:::t::::r.._ ___ ,_,_ s1.oo I I I I 1-1--1 I I soso+-J I I I H I -1 s o.oo I I I I I I I I I ,,.. t n s ''" n n ''" nn n "" ,,2 I 40% 30% 20% -1014 -0% Figure I I IC11 Farebox Rec overy Ratio l -----r---tu 1"S 1U6 1ttJ , .. ISU I"" 1ft1 19U 30,000 20,000 1 0.000 0 Figure IU C20 Passenger Trips Per E m ployee EI I blJJ I \tU un ''" "" ,, .. nu tHO ,,, nn Figure IIIC1 5 Operat ing E xpense Per Revenue Mile $4.00 ---. $2.00 $1.00 1 0.00 19t4 I'N.S ISU t9t1 UN 1$t ltto 1 1 1991 Figu r e IIIC18 Vehide M ires Per Peak Vehid e 50,000 40, 000 I ,-I -,. v 30,000 --20.000 r----10,000 -f---i-0 -------------------,,.. '"s "" ,,.., t t u ,,., o , un $0.60 50.40 50. 20 so.oo F igura IIIC21 Average Fare I I I -,-UU IUS 19M 1UJ net 1 1 990 1991 1tn

PAGE 128

JXTA SUMMARY System Total capital expense decreased from $8,754,030 in I 991 to $3,3 I 5,330 i n 1 992, a dec l ine of app r oximate l y 62 percent. In f Y I 99 I, JXTA purchased twe nty new buses, comp leted some major faci lity improvement projects, and procured right of-way for a fixed-guideway system exte n s i o n among othe r expendi t u r es. Capital purchases in FY 1992 included only support and office equipment, maintenance parts and the replace m ent of equipment, the r eby r esulling in the declin e System Total local revenue increased f rom in l99J 10 $23,357,lSO in l992 According to JXTA. thi s 39 percent incr ease ca n be auribuled to the increased use of local sales t a x revenue. l11e t o t al energy consumed by the automa ted g u ideway mode increased 2 8 percent from 44 1 690 kil owatthou r s in 1991 to 563,570 kilowatt hours i n 1992. This i ncrease resulted from I he rcsis r or bridge 1ha 1 p rovides dynamic braking for the veh icle-s, which increases 1he amounl of power consumed by system Dynamic b r aking was imp l emented in rv 199 J to reduce 1 h e cos1 of brake pads Th e number of incidents (dirc.>etJy.operaced mo1o rbus onl y) decreased more chan 12 percent from 97 roadcalls in I 99 I to 85 r oadcalls in 19. JXTA could not ide.ntify an exp lanation for this improvement in other t ha n g ood fomme Tite number of System Tota l roadcalls declined frorn 1 598 i n 1991 to I ,264 in 1992, a decrease of approximately 21 percent. Most of thi s decline i s due to (I decrease in ro:tdcalls for the motorbus mode. JXTA credits 1he continuing success of its extensive preventive maimenan ce program t hat was during FY 1991 for this redu ction i n IOJ

PAGE 129

D. HILLSBOROUGH AREA REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM PROFILE I Structure-Hillsboro u g h Area Regional Transit ls an indep e ndent authority Go\'ernint:: llody.1;nd Composil1on -HART i$ gov emed by a Soa r d of Dir ecto r s compri$ed of ten member s : four represen ting Hillsborough County. three rep resencing t h e city o f T a mpa, one repre se nti ng the cily ofT ern pte T c mu;c and two representi n g the sta t e of F lori da Service Area HART serves all of Hillsborough C ounty excludin g P l ant City M odes HART provides o nly fixed-route motorbus to the s ervice area indicated above Contracted scrvicc. s includ e some vehicle and facility mainte nance, j anitoria l serv ice, a n d other min o r services 104

PAGE 130

PERFORMANCE INDICA TORS Service Area Population (000) Service Ate a Si2:e (squate miles} Passe nger Trip.$ (000) P assenge r Miles (000) V eh i c l e MilO S (000} Revenu e Miles (000 ) Veh icie H o u r s (000) Revenue Hou rs (000 ) Route M)es Tolal Operating Expe nse (000} Total Opeg (000 ol 1984 S) TOUI Maintenance Expense (000) Total Ma
PAGE 131

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY Vahlcle Milu Per Capita SERVICE CONSUMPTION P assenger Trip6 P e r Capita Poasenger Ttips P t r Revenu e M ite Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour OUALITY OF SERVICE Average Speed (R.M.JA. H .) Avttlgt Age of Fleet (11'1 year s) Number of Incidents TOCoiRoodcals Miles Between lncideols (000) Revenue M iiH Between Roadcal$ (000) AVAUIIIUTY Revenue MiMs Per Route Mile (000) 106 TABLE lll-01 H ills b oroug h Area Regional Transit Meas-ures 1987 19U 1989 1990 8 77 9.26 9 .8 0 9.73 10.6 7 IO.S2 12.46 1 2 74 1.32 1.32 1.49 1 ,48 19.44 18.01 19.33 20 97 14 7 4 13.61 12.93 14 13 4 10 5. 1 0 5 .48 6 23 259 .00 264.00 284 .00 321. 00 2.912 .00 2.852.00 2.818 .00 2.899.00 25.02 25.58 24.67 22.30 2.23 2.37 2 .49 2.<47 8 14 ---4.62 4 .87 Uti 1992 'k c""m 1987-19 2 7.82 7 78 -11.28% !1.89 9 98 < ,, -6.4 4% 1.47 1.4 8 1 2 07% 2 1 .20 21.88 1 2 46% 1 14.79 0 34% 7.19 7.93 93.41% 352.00 315.00 21.62% 2.901.00 2,889.00 .0.79% 18 10 17.88 -28. 57% us .43% 3.84 3 .83 -52.91 %

PAGE 132

EFF I CIENCY MEASURE S COST EFF ICIENCY Operat ing Expense Pe! Capi ta "' Ope r ati n g E xpense Per Peak Vehicle (000} Operai. it\g Per Pa$"sen9er Trip Operating Expense P er Passenge r Mil e Operatin g R eve nue Mile Operat ing Expense Per Revenu e Hou r ,. >-' Expense Per Revenue M il e Ma inten anc e Ex p Per Operating Exp O PERATIN G RATIOS F3rebox Re<:o\lery l ocal Reven ue P e r Operaling E xpense OJ>ei atlng RevenU"' Per Oper ating Expense VEHICLE U TILIZATION Vehide Miles Per Peak. Vehie\e (000) Vehicie Hours Per Peek. Vehide (000) Revenue Miles Per Veh i c l e Mi:les Revenu e Miles Per Tolal Vehicles (000) Revenu e Hours Per Tolal Veh icles (000) LABOR P RODUCTIVITY Reven u e Hou rs Per Employee (000) Passenger T rips Per Employee (000) EN E RG Y UTI LIZAT I ON Vehicle Mites Per Gallon FARE Average Fare TABLE lll Hillsborough Area Regiun : tl Transit Effi<:ieney Measures 1987 1988 1989 $16.97 $16.39 $20. 1 7 $94.46 $108. 44 $110.17 51.59 51.70 5 1.62 50. 3 7 $0.40 50.37 $2.1 0 $ 2 .25 52.42 $3o.93 $30.62 $31.31 So.42 $0.44 $0.45 19.90% 19. 53% 16 ,41% 26.87 % 24.13% 22.48% 84.81% 8-4.14% 8 1 .06% 30. 10% 26.99% 25.90% 46.62 54.62 53.51 3.49 3 9 3 3 .93 0 .92 0.66 0.85 3 7 .25 38.55 36. 1 2 2 .53 2.63 2 .79 1.06 1.30 1.26 20.60 23.37 2 4 .69 3.61 3 .67 3 .76 $0.43 $0. 41 $0.36 1990 1991 1992 %Change 1987-1992 $24.04 $22.94 $25.14 48.09% 5 143. 21 5 138. 15 $ 157.63 66.87% $1.69 52.32 52.52 58.29% $0.37 50.49 50.57 53.30% $2.60 $3.41 53.72 77.40% 539.57 S<9. 16 $55.05 78.0 1 % $0.46 50.66 $0. 70 6 6 .77% 17 .29% 19.48% 1 8 .71% .99% 20.93% 21.94% 20.-43% 23.96% 79.91% 63.24% 79.95% 5.73% 23.38% 25.48% 23.92% 55% 57.96 47. 1 2 48.80 0.03% 3 .94 3 .17 3 31 -5.12% 0 .88 0.86 0 .87 5.90% 36.90 3 t .14 30.94 .94% 2 6 1 2 1 6 2 .09 -17.22% 1 ,43 0 .95 1.07 1.02% 2 9 91 20.12 23.<0 13.60% 3 .65 3.53 3.44 4 .?3% $0.40 50. 5 1 $0.51 20.36% 107

PAGE 133

GENERAL QUESTIONS 1. Were any far e cha n ges made d ur i n g fiscal yea r 1 992? If so, please prov id e t he prev i ous fare structure as well as the updated fare s t ruc t u r e and indicate w hen the changes were implemented. No c-hanges were made. 2 Wer e !here ;my sig n ilicnnl cha nges: in scrvi c c/sctvice tu ca dudng liscill yea r 1 992? In Aug u st 1992, there was a complete r eorga n i za tion of service Several of the leas t utilized outlying routes we-re drop p ed; m ost of these routes were for exp r ess service. In additio n service was incr eased a lon g the systems m o s t utilized routes. 3 Have there been any recent c-hanges o r significan t eve,us t ha t may help explain the perf ormance of the transit system? 108 I n addition to the complete reo rganization of service indi c ated i n questio n #2, a "sicko u t .. bega n ill August 1991 involving a large number of tra nsp o rtation opcnuing employees and was not sett led unti1 Februaty 1992. This s ic.koul and the subsequent arbitrat ion case had a s i gnificant impact on t h e system's performance.

PAGE 134

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTION IS DATA I From t he data in the tab l e below, it is evident lhat r i dership and 1 he amount or motorbus service provided has declined slightly between 1991 and 1992. Please explain these declines. OlrectlyOperat ed Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 Pass.enger Trips 8 ,338,540 8,323.710 Revenue 5,668,360 5,630,680 Revenue Hours 393,260 380 800 Vchs Oper. in M3JC. S e Nice 1 40 133 System Response: 111e declines can be attributed to the cutbacks i n service t h at occurred in A ug u st 1992 as pan of HART's comJ)lete service reo rganiz.'ltion. Due to financial const raints, hours of ser\ice were decreased a n d a number of unproductive routes were dropped 2. Despite the decli11e ilt service indicated in the previous table, total openuing expense increased more thiln eight per c ent f rom $ 1 9,341, I I 0 in 1991 to $20,964,220 in 1992. Is there an exp l anation for this increase? Syswm Response: Accotding to HART. t he tn<'tiOrit y of t his incr ease r esulted f r o m the sick o ut t hat began in Augu s t 1991. Overtime hours increased sign i licantly during the sickout and legal fees were also incurred. In addition, the s ettlement ir\ February 1992 c arried major doUar costs including employee backpay 3 Please explain the signilieant increase in cap i tal expense from $980,850 i n 1991 to SJ,400,4JO i n 1992. What cap ital purchases were made in 1991? In 1992? System Rcspor,se: In both FY J 991 rmd 1992, capilitl funds were used for building i mp rO\'Cnu:ntS a n d the purchase of operating nnd trnnsitrclmc d equi pment. Howev er the incr ease resu h ed from a significant incrcusc in the amoun t of capitul funds spent on revenu e veh icl es. I n FY 1992, more than $525,000 was used f o r three major items: the installation of a nonspill fuel syst e m on all r evenue vehi cles, the 1>urchnse of reb u ilt engi n es, and the leasing of tires 4. T ot n l .:mployees decreased from 414. $ FTs in 1991 10 355.1 FTEs i n 1992, primaril y due to a 1 9 perceru d ec l ine in tr::msponation operating e m ployees (2855 nEs in 1 991; 232 2 FTEs in 1992). P lease explain 1he change in 1his employee ca1egory. Syst e m Response: The decline in this particulnr emp l oyee category dur i ng this ti m e wos due to the decrease in drivers th at resuhed from the sicko u ; and t h e subseque .nt arbitrat i on case. 5. Total gallons cons umed increased rrom 1 ) 866,950 gallons in 1991to 1,886,660 gallons i1l 1992. To what can l his incr ease be attributed, give n the declines in se r vice and in the m unbcr of vehicles operated in maximum s ervice? 109

PAGE 135

System Response: The one percent i ncrease in fuel consumptio n ean be attributed to che declining fuel efficiency (i.e., fewer m i les per gallon) of HART's older vehi cles 6 The nunlbcr of i ncidents decreased from 352 in I 991 t o 315 in 1992. G iven the. unpredi ctability of t hese events, a r e there any possible reasons for this decline? Systenl Response: HART believes t h a t this decline is the result of improve
PAGE 136

-' ) aJ tJ) ....1 ..J J: D L.-1 -0 g -" 0 ., 3 -00 -' .. = .. :!:! 5<1: v '\ ,.-I I I """ r 0 0 0 u 2 -1 \ \ I [ t\l I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I J I i i I I 0 0 0 0 N I ; 1 : = I I : 1 ; I & . -1 -I : I I I ........ l l 1 '-'I' ! I I 0 0 -:;j ..... I 0 0 N I I I I I l I I 0 0 -1 : I ; l : : -

PAGE 137

1 1 2 HILLSBOROUGH AREA RAN SIT 10.0 8.0 Figure 111 Vehlde Miles Per Capita Dol 6 0 I --__ ,.. -..1 J 4 0 0 -r-2.0 <.o ---------. ---;., .-. :.-:-. 0 0 19M 19U 1986 1911 ltlt tnt 19 1"1 1991 Efrec:tivencss Measures Figure 111-010 A verage Age o, f\e-et tye;ns ) Figure 111 Passe n ger Trips Per Revenue Mile 1.S ./ IJ -. -1 --., f--0.) -1---- 1H4 ,JS IU6 ltU ltU 19Jt 1990 " 1ttl 1 0 J 6.0 4.0 1 -2.0 0.0 ,,.. nas ,,.., nu "" 1nt '"o ,,.,, Figure 1)1-01 1 Revenue Miles Between Accident s/Incidents Figure 111012 Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls 30,000 I I I .1"-r I -....... \ v "\ :,..... 2 ,500 n --1L 2,0 ](), 001) 1.Sto 1 0,000 1 .oto 500 -I 0 ,, ,. ,,.s ''*' ,,., 1111 uu nto "" nn IJI4 198S 19$6 Utr ''" IU9 1Hr) 1991 nn

PAGE 138

HILLSBO R OUGH AREA REGIONAL TRANS I T 1 Figure 111 j Operating E xpense Per Capita SlOOOI I I I I J s2o.oo1 I b I/ I !-"" -dt S10.00 : : I SO.OO i--1-l--l-l-1--l-l-t9ac l9tS 19$6 1!81 ''" 1tn 111?1 1 ttl Figure 111-016 Maintenance Expens e Per Revenue Mile 50.40 .... l1 --1---50.80 S0.60 50. 20 --SO.OO ---1-1--''" t?as t'Jt6 t9n tna "" a'Jo lnl ,.,n Figure 111 Revenue Hours Per Employee ::::g l 900 1 I I I I I 600 --, -T I l --.-I 300 0 t 'JU. t9U '"' \987 l't!S 1989 1990 19t1 19n Efficiency Meas ures Figure 111 014 Operating bpense Pe r Passenger Trip I rj S3.00 ,--,.--,-,--,.--,-,--,.--, 1 19$S 1985 1U1 19U 19H WtO 1991 F igure 111011 Farebox Recovery Ratio 30% .--r-=:c-. r r [T-1 -ll -20 .. . % 10% 'i-r I (r l ---.. --.:::-: --::::-;: ----1'JU IUS 1U' 1988 I'JU IHO 1 991 19tl 30 ,000 20 ,000 1 0 ,000 0 Figure 111 Passenger Trips Per Employee I I I))/ I . I--1-. ,_._. 1-19l4 193S 19t6 I'JU 19U 1' 1990 1S'JI 1992 F igure llf-01 5 Ope r ating Expense Per Revenue Mite S-4.00 T ,.. y-l .Y -r-.,...I --' 1-::::1 S3.00 Sl.OO 51.00 I I so.oo 1--1--1-f-f---1 .. --1 i 19a4 1?1$ 1!lt6 1'JU 1Ua 19\10 , l l f i gure 111 018 Vehicle Mlles Per Peak Vehide 60,000 T--' .,. ---r--40,000 20.000 I I --., . __ L -... 1 -0 1984 t ttS uu ''u t'JU ,,., 1'1'0 199 1 un 1 S0. 60 I S0 40 $0.20 so.oo Figure IU-021 Average Fare --: r 1 I I v) [ I --. I ------r 19M tUS 1'Jt6 1981 19St 1989 1'J'SO 1,_,1 \99l 113

PAGE 139

IIART SU MMARY 114 Oesr ite slight declines in the n .mount of service provided by HART, total operating expense inc. reased more than eight percent from S 1 9,3 4 1 .110 in 1991 1 0$20,964,220 in 1992. The majorily of1his increase rc.sulled from "sickoul" lhal began in AuguSI 1991 and was nol se1lled unlil February 1992. Sickoul costs includtd an inc:rc3$C in overtime incurred legal fees., and a settlement tha t included employee bae-kpay. capilal expense increased approxima1ely 43 pc:roenl from $980,850 in 1991 10 S l,400,410 in 1992. According lo H ART, lhe increase can be altribuled to a significan t increase in capita l e x penditures on its revenue vehicle O eet : the ins talla tion of a non-spill fue. l system on all revenue vehicles, lhe purchase or rebuilt engines, and tire leasing. T o t c a l empl oyees dcc::rcascd 1 4 percent from 414.5 FTE s in 1991 t o 3S5.7 FTEs i n 1992, primnrily due to a 19 percent decline in HART's tr ans portat i on opera ting employee c l a ssifica tion. Tite decline in transpona t ion opera ting, employees dur ing t his time was due to the decrease in driver$ dtat resulted f rom th e sickout a nd the subsequent arbitration case The number of incid ents declined f rom 352 incidents in 199lto 3 lS intidents in 1992. HART cited improved and increased training or drivers a$ a possib le reason for thi.s dccTCa$C in incident occurrence.

PAGE 140

E. PINELLAS SUNCOAST TRANSIT AUTHORITY SYSTEM PROFILE Organizational Structure Pinellas Sunc-oast Transit Authority is an independent aut hority created by special act of t h e Florida Legislatme (Chapter 70-907, House Bill No. 5465). Governing Body and PSTA is go\'erned by a Board of Direc.rors comprised of appointees from th.e member municipalities who <'tre either elec
PAGE 141

PER F ORMANCE INDI CATORS ServiOO Area Population ( 0 00) SeNice A rea m i1es} Passenger Trips (000) Passenger Miles (000) Vehicl e Miles (000) R eve n u e Miles (000) VehiGi c NOU(S (000) Reven u e Hou r s (000) Route Miles Total Ot>Ct3ting Expense ( 000) T olal O perating Expen se (000 o f 198 4 $) T o t al M a inten a nce Expanse (000) To t al Mainte n a n c e Expense (00 0 o f 1984 S) Total C a pital Expe n se (000) T o tal L ocal Revenu e (000) Ope r a t ing Revenue (000} P a ssenger F a r e Reve nues (000) T o t a l Empl oyees f(anspotU.t;on Operatin g Employeos Maintenance Employees Administrative E m ployees Veh icles Available For Maxi m u m S ervice Veh icles O perated i n Maximum Servioe Spar e Ratio Total Gallon s Con s umed {000} I I 6 TABLE 111-El Pin tllas Suncoast T r ansit Authority Perf ormance I ndicators 1987 1988 1989 199 0 8 28.70 839 .90 8 55.43 85 1 66 n/3 n/a n/3 n / a 6 745 50 8 313 53 8 624 .2 2 9 ,030. 07 41.684 30 4 4 .537 .4 1 44 760.60 45, 6 1 0 .87 5,260.00 5 152. 95 5 ,249.1 9 5 748 .2 8 4 ,945.80 4 786 2 6 4,681 8 4 5,372 85 360 7 0 363 85 .. 377 98 400 73 340.4 0 341 ,64 357 .23 3 80 33 1,030.40 1 0 3 0 .40 1 ,030.40 1.059. 4 0 $ 1 3 .111. 1 0 $14 164. 80 $15.8 1 9 83 $ 1 7,559 .73 $11,865 60 $ 1 2 357 92 $13 ,235. 96 $ 1 3 986.48 $2 700 89 $3,067 29 $3, 131. 33 $3 458.24 $2 444 36 $2 6 7 6 .02 $2 .619. 89 $2 7 54 5 2 .. $ 3 090.60 $4 06 7. 37 $3,614 64 $3 5 4 0.24 $ 1 0 6 7 4.46 $ 12 1 8 7. 13 $13,083 69 $15 5 7 8.76 $3 006 2 2 $2 9 4 0.96 $2,899.97 $3,065.44 $ 2 785. 45 $2, 680. 25 $2 ,717.12 $3 006 56 3 9 7 70 361 40 406 .90 355 30 299 .60 257.80 299.90 253 30 .. 55 30 61 .50 54.70 56 10 42.80 .. 42 10 5 2 .30 45 90 131.00 128 .00 1 38 .00 126 00 199 1 655 76 n/3 57,725 63 6, 190.11 5 716 .87 ... 424.73 400. 58 1,703.00 $19 2 7 9 .2 1 l$14,526.84 $3 885 6 8 . $580 18 $ 1 7 531.66. $4 ,0 28 42 $ 3 6 1 5 3 2 364 80 . ;; ; 2 .67.30 ',, 60 70 36 8o" .. 1 32. 00 123 .00 9 6 .00 ... : 1 1 2 .00 i15.00 .. 105 00 6.50% 30. 61% 23 2 1 % 9 5 7 % 25.71% 1 426.60 I 379 .81 .. 1 443 6 2 I ,602 04' 1 .697 .08 1 992 1 987-19 2 436.87 47 26% 142.69 n/a ( .{,.. _,_ -' . 7.64% 50 8 56.35 2 2 0 0 % ' 6 256.68 . 1 8 95% 5 775 26 1 6 .77% 21. 7 0% H6.31 22 3 0 % 1,703.00 65.28% 1 $ 2 0.2 4 9 39 5 4.44% I .. . $}4,617 : 03 ;. ' $4,437.20 64.29% $ 3, 202 99 3 t .04% I . $5,6 96 99 84 .33% $ 1 8 ; 453 19:, . 7 2 87% $4,211. 20 40 0 8 % I $3,929 4 1 . 4 1 07% 391. 50 1 .56% -3.50% ,, . . 64 50 16 .64% 3 7 90 'f: 1 1 '.45%; 1 49 00 1 3 74% ,._.. ..,..,. ; -15:45% . 43.2'1% n l a .,,, 1 7 0 6 78 19 ? 8 %

PAGE 142

EFFECT IVEN E SS MEASURES SERVICE SUPP L Y Mi!Gt Per Capita SERVICE CONSUMPTI O N Passenger T riPS Pe-r Capita P:.lssenger Trips Per Reven u e Mil e f?er Rev8nu e Hou r QUALITY O F SERVIC E Averag e Speed (R.M .IR. H ) Ave rage Age of Ffee t (in yea.rs) ., < ' -, Number of I nci de n ts Total Revenue I n cident s (000} R e v e nue M il es Betv.-een Roadcal!s (000) AVAILABi lrTY Miles Per R oUte Mile (000) ,, TABLE III-E2 Pinellas S u ncoas t Transit Authority Effectiveness Measures 1987 6 .35 10.55 1.77 25.69 14.53 6 .80 257.00 I 372 .0 0 19.24 3 .60 4 .80 1988 6 1 4 I ;. 9 .90 1.7 4 24.33 14.01 8 .00 216.00 968.00 22.16 4.94 4 .65 1989 6.1 4 10 .08 1.17 24.14 I 13.67 7.5 1 243.00 I ,077.00 20.09 4 .53 4 7 4 1990 6.7 5 1 0 .60 1.68 23.74 14 .t3 7.40 169.00 I ,363.00 31.79 3 .94 $.07 1 991 7 ,23 12.63 1.89 26.97 14.27 9 .63 103.00 1 423 .00 55.50 4.02 3 .36 1992 14.32 21.$$ 1 .63 22.6 1 13. 87 8.99 168.00 \ ,871. 00 3 4 38 3 09 3 39 %Change 1987-1992 125 64% 104. 19% 7 .82% 1 1.99% 4.52% 32.21% -34.63% 36 37% 78. 63% 31% -29.35% 117

PAGE 143

118 EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Operating Expense Per Capita Operati n g ElCpense Per Peak Vehicle (000) Operating Expense Pe r Passenger Trip Operating Expense Per Passenge r Mile Oper.>.<-< < -... ll,,. '' > > k> $183.61 S l 94 .71 82.66% ., -. .. . ". . ., .. :. $1.76 .. <'$2 .15 ..... 43.48% . I $0 33 . $3 37 .. $48.13 $0.68 20. 1 5% 1 8 :'Z5% 90 .94 % $0 40 26 59% '-... ' "' '"" $3.51 $48 64 32.26% 26 28% . .. $0.7.7 r. 21. 91% 40.69% 6 .37% 19:41% I ,_,;: .. ';;.;._,, 8 66" ,.... ;: .. 1'0 91.13% 11.93% : n .. 6% I : "io.ilor. ..... 20 .80% :9.30% 49.99 1 3.48 0.93 42.64 ,.- < 3.02 1 :: 1 .07 25.42 .. 58.95 4 .05 0 92 . 43 .31 3.03 1.10 29. 62 .. ... 4 22 0 .9 2 "';::it< : "''I > 36.76 .. Z.79' 1 40.68% 43.93% . . ,, 2 66% : 7 : 52% "'I 06 I' 24 24" ; . > t; : : : .: 10 24.05 9 .35% .::. :.364I':Y: . 3 5 9 : : 1.;.": :355' '' u .-. '-_,.,. >; _; .. ...... :69" ;;<'(.>(-,_ u -->
PAGE 144

GENERAL QUESTIONS 1. W ere any fare c ha nges made dur ing fiscal year 1992? If so, p lease provide t h e previous fare structure as well as th e updated far e S t r u<:IUre and indicate-when th e changes were impl e m ented. Effective Oct ober 1. 1991, PSTA impl emented several changes to their f are struc ture inc l u ding far e increas e s and t h e d isconti nua t ion of t h e 2 I R ide Punc h Tic k et. Changes in the cas h f are and p repaid pas s stru t l u res a r e shown below. Full Cash Far e Elder l y and Handi cappc Tic k e t 1 0-Ride Punch Ticket 20-Ride Half fnre l 'une h Ticket Elderly. Handicapped, and Students 2. Were there any s ignificant c hanges in s ervice/service area dur ing fiscal y ear 1992? Old New $0.7 5 $0. 80 $0.35 $0.40 $0.40 $0.40 S O .IO $0.10 SO. OS so.os S J.50 $1.50 nfa $27.00 $8 00 $ 1 0 00 $25 00 $35 00 $15.00 Discontinued $7.00 D iscootir ) u e d n / n $7.20 n /n $8.00 Some rerouting was r e quired dur ing the 1992 Dsc.'tl year due to the l oss of co ntr:'rflow lanes around the major downtown St. J>eu:rsburg transfer l i rcility. 3. Have ther e been a n y recent chrul ges or signific;.mt events that may he l p exp l a i n th e performance of t h e transit syst e m ? N o s i gnificant changes took place during FY 1992. J n add i t ion t o the r erouting t h a t took place at t h e m;tior St. Peter sburg transfer faci l ity, as discussed i n questio n # 2 t h e amo unt of time that a bus coul d remain at a location was reduced. A l so, i n ear l y 1992, a Comprehensive O p eratio n a l Analysis wus performed resulting in recommendations for route con soli d : ui ons t h a t woul d reduce duplication as w ell as adding two new east-wc;.-st routes. However, implementation of mos t of 1 he took p lace during t h e 1993 fisc;tl ycl"tr. 1 1 9

PAGE 145

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTION IS DATA I As indicated in t he table below, bot h passenger trips and passenger miles decreased sig n ificantly d espite s l i ght increases in the amount o f s ervice provided. Is there a n expl anation for the ridership declin e? Directly-Operat e d Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 %Chang e Passen ge r Trips 10.805.160 9,41 3,740 12 .9% Passenger Ml:es 57,725 ,830 50.656.350 -11.9% ; Reven u e M iles 5,716,670 5 ,775 260 1. 0% R evenue Hours 400,580 416.3 1 0 3.9% ' System Response: According to PSTA. t h e recouting that occurred due: to the J oss of the contranow l anes around the majo r downtow n St. Petersburg t ransfe r facility accounts for a portion of the i n cf'ease in r evenue m iles and revenue h ours, and may have contributed to the decrease in passenger t rips and p assenger miles. However, no p redictabl e trend has occurred to exp l a i n t he decrease in ridership. 2. Maintenance expe.nse i ncreased 14 percent from $3.885,680 i n 1991 to $4)437,200 in 1992. explain t h i s inc rease. System Response: The major increases in t he maintenanc e expenses are attributab le t o salaries wages. a nd fringe benefits. Most maintenance empl oyees are unionized and. therefore. receive i n cre.ases as deten nined through a collective bargaining cont ra ct. Fringe benefits directl y related to wages would consequent!)' increase pro portionally. I n additio n a new Maintenance Department Direct o r was hired during the year. After wages and fringe bC-Jlefits, the m ost s ignificant inc rease was i n material s and supplies, prim ari l y due to t he purchase of r epair parts and shop supplies. 3. 111case expl a i n the s ignificant increase i n capital exp ense from $580,18 0 in 1991 t o $ 5 ,696,990 in 1992. What capital p urc hases we r e made in 1991 ? I n 1992? 1 20 System Response: During FY 1991, fixed assets of approximately $222,000 were p urc h a s e d and capital exp e nse items totalled $315)000, the g reatest porti on of which was for leasing lires Duri ng t h e 1992 fiscal year, P STA purchased t h e following capital items: Revenue Veh i cles Non-Revenue Vehicles Shellers Co nputer Equipme n t Capi1al Expense Items O t he r Fixed Asset Purcha ses TOTAL $ 3,555,910 78,810 2 4 2 ,915 348,333 953,6 9 5 5 1 7,327 $5,696,990 Some of t he i1ems purchased dur ing F Y 1992 would have h ad bid pa c kages "on the strcc1" durin g FY 1991, but PSTA had not received nor pa i d for the se purc h ases until t he subsequent fiscal year. PSTA has made a dedicated effort to cl ose out several capital grants f rom t he Fede ral Transit Admini s t r ation.

PAGE 146

4. f>:lssengcr fare rev enue increased n ine pe rcent f rom $3,615,320 in 1991 to S3,929,410 in 1992 despite t he 13 percent decl i ne in t he number of passenga t r ips m entioned previously. 1ll is resulted in a significant inc reas e in ave r age far e p e r passenger trip from $0.33 in 1991 to $0.42 in 1992. I s this the result of a fare inc rease (sec also
PAGE 147

i 22 P I NELLAS SUNCOAS T TRAN S IT AUTHORI T Y Figu re lliE1 County/Service Area Popu lation ( 000) 1,0 00 I I I \ -800 600 4<)0 200 1--0 1 1U4 1tts 1 ')86 tUJ t!IU tM'J 1990 U'tl 19!11 Performance I n dicators 12 000 1 9 ,000 .... F igure IIIE2 Pssenger Trips (000) / 6,00 0 ,. __ L f-3 ,000 0 J .... 1,.4 IUS t?U t 9t1 UU UU ttto ,,, 1,2 F i gure IIIE3 Veh icle Miles and R evenue Miles Figu r e lli-E4 Total Operating Exp ense Figu r e III ES Passctnger Fare Revenues {000) ::: : 1 b l I PJ;Ll t r ------, -.ooo I l,OOO i }i-f-0 1--1-1 I LJ -1 , ... 1')85 ''" 1 981 , .. 1989 1990 ,,, 1992 Figure III E6 T o tal Empl oyees 300 IJffE I 500 200 -100 ---------_ _I 0 $ 25,0 0 0 -:::'L ;--;'"' ---I -.. $20,0 00 $15 ,000 $ 1 0 ,000 s s .ooo IOI,ol
PAGE 148

15.0 12. 0 9.0 PINE L LAS SUN COAST TRAN S I T A U THOR I TY Figure IIIEB Veh ide M i les Per Capi t a ----Effectiveness Measures 2.5 li 2.0 1.5 Figure IIIE9 Pass e n g e r Trips Per Revenue Mile .. 1--I-'--' 6 0 -EE :tfl + -! . 1 0 3.0 o.s 0.0 0.0 1984 t98S "" tn7 ll tnt 1990 "" 1991 '"' IUS t9$6 ,., ' '"' ""' tnt Ut! IIIE 1 0 Average Age of Fleet (years) B---v -. 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2 0 1---0 0 ----1 ----tnt t \IU 1 ,,., ''" ,., 1 990 tUt '"2 figure IIIE11 Revenue Miles Between Accid ents/Incidents 60,00 0 dO,OOO ------.... ,. --lA / -;;; I L I 20,000 0 ''lA IUS '"' 1 87 1988 an 19'90 ' 1"2 Figure IIH12 Revenue Miles Between Road
PAGE 149

124 PINELLAS SUNCOAST TRANSI T AUTHORITY sso.oo $40.00 SlO.OO $20.00 $10.00 so.oo Figure III-E13 Operati ng Expense Per Capita ---1 -. . --_ I -V-!---. =.LEEJJ_j "at 1 915 " 1 987 "" "" 1990 "" '"2 Figure 1114E16 Mai ntenance E>epense Per Revenue Mile $0.80 r-I 1....SG.60 S0 40 --I ........ v :v --50. 20 -so.oo --+' nt lUS 19&6 19t1 1988 Itt' 1 990 199 1 19n Figure III E19 Revenue Hours Per Emp loyee 1,200 ; -I rn 1 I .. _4---j 900 6oo1 -I I I +-1--t I I 1 I 1 --11 o 1 -c:-1 984 1935 19l6 1H1 19# 1U! 1950 1"1 1"2 Efficiency Measures Figure III-E14 Operating E>cpense Per Passenger Trip $2.50 $2.00 -. ,.... I 7 $1.50 $1 00 so.so . 1-$0.00 -IH4 IUS IW6 1,81 UU 19t9 1,0 1991 lttl 30% 20% 10% 0% Figure 111-E17 Farebox Recovery Rati o E i QJJ I L -I ,,.. n.s "" n n "" "" 1no "" "'2 Figure III E20 Passeng e r Tr ips Per Emp loyee : : : : .rm. -m 20,000 I I I -' 10,000 0 --1984 19$S 19$6 1,_7 ,, .. 1t., 19,1 ''fl Figureii iE1S Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile --lr-1 O ,......r-. )0 1 ---: -$4.00 $3. 00 $2 00 $1. 00 I I $0.00 -_, .::-; I ,... tns au t 987 uu ''*' '''o '"' ''n F i gure 111 Vehlde Miles Per Peak Vehicl e 80,000 = r = / ,_ ..... I 60,000 4(),000 I --20,000 0 1984 1985 "" ,,., 1 988 ,., ''" "" 19tl so. so $ 0. 40 $0.30 50. 20 $0.10 so.oo Figure III-E21 Average Fare -'-- v -'"" u n ' 1917 "" '"' 1no ' '"z

PAGE 150

PSTA SUMMARY P S TA''s passe n ger tr i ps decreased 13 pe r cen t from 10,805,160 t r i ps i n 1991 to 9,4 13,740 trips in 1992 w hil e passenger miles declined 12 per ce n t fr o m 57 miles i n 1991 to 50,856 350 miles in 1992. PSTA believes that t he rerout ing th a t occurred dur i ng f Y I 992 due t o the l oss of contraflow lanes around th e major downtow n St. Petersburg transfer faci l ity may h ave contrib uted t o these declines. Ma inten ance expense incr eased 14 perc ent from $3,885,680 i n 199 1 to $4,437,200 in 19 92. Acco rding to J>STA, the majority of 1his i n crease c a n be attributed to i n cre(lses in the salaries, wages, and fringe benefits of maintenance personnel. Total cap i tal expense i ncre a sed si gni ficantly from $ 5 80,180 in 1991 t o $5,696,99 0 in 19 9 2. In a d dition to spending mor e capi tal dollars on fixed asset purchases M d cap ital expense items ($537,000 in FY $1,47 1 ,022 i n FY 1992), PSTA also p u rchased re.ventJe and non re v enue vehi c l es, sh dter s and c o mp uter equipmen t in FY 1992. The number of vehicles a\ailable for mnximum service inc r eased 13 percent from 132 vehicle s in 1991 t O 1 4 9 vehic les i n 1992 During FY 1992 PSTt\ purch n s cd 22 ne w moto rbus vehicJes a n d sold five older veh i cles > which resulte d in t h e net i n cr eilSC of 17 vehicl<:s in PST A' s rev e nue v ehicle fleet. nle. number of i ncidents incre ased sign ilican tl}' from 103 i nc i d e nts in 1991 t o 168 i ncidents in 1992. Howe ver, PSTA cou ld no t provide an exp l an a tion for 1 his inc rease. nle number of rondcalls increase d more t h n n 31 p ercent from 1 .423 roadcc:11ls in 1991 to 1 .87 1 roadcttlls in 1992. '11t i s i n creas e c::an lx atlributcd to mechanical failures in the older b u ses t h at were uti lized unti l PSTA 's new veh icle s were p l a ced in service 125

PAGE 151

F. LYNX (OR LANDO) SYSTF;M PROFILE Organi7.a1ional LYNX, fon nerly T r i Colmty Transit, is an independ ent author i ty created b y inter local agreement to p r ovide public transportation services G<)\'erning Body and Com posiCion LYNX's B oar d of D irectors i s comprised of members appointed by pa rties involved i n the inter l ocal a greement including Orange Count y Seminole County, Osceola County, t he City of Orl a ndo, the East Ce ntral Regional Planni ng Council, and t he Flodda Department of T ransportation. Sen icc Area -LYNX provid e s s e tvi ce to Orange Co u nty ( including Orlando, Wint er Park, Mai tland, a n d others), S eminole County ( i n cluding Altamonte Spr ings, Casselberry and Sa nford ) and Osceo l a Co u nty ( i n cluding Kissimmee St. Cloud). Mod<'.s LYNX provides fixcdroutc-motorbus se rvice s, pur e hased demand res ponse servi c es, and coordinates a five-county regio nal ridesh aring as.si slanee program. 126

PAGE 152

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Service Atea {000) Servic e Area Size {squa r e mile s) Passeftger Trips (01?:0) M ile-s (000) Veh icle M iles (000) Reven u e Miles (000) Vo h ;cle t
PAGE 154

PERFORMANCE INDI CATORS SeiVice Area (000) > Servil;e Ale a Size (sq ua 1 e m'iles} Passe nger Tri ps {000) (000) Ve hicle' MilOS (000) '.. . ;., ,. Revenue M iles (000) . Vehicle Hov r s (000 ) Revenue Hours (000) R o u t e Mil e s r:. Total Oper:.,ting E)l(pen se (000) T otal Opera ting Expe nse (000 o f 1 984 $ ) Total Mainten a nce El(pense { 0 0 0) TOt a l Maintenance ExPense {000 of t 984 $) . T ot a l Capita l Expcnso (000) Total L oca l Revenue.(OOO) '' Oper ating Revenue (000) Panengcr Fare Reve n u e s (000) Total E m ployees Ytansportalion .Emp.loY$es Mai nlen;:Jn ce Employees EmplOyees V e h i cles A vailab l e for Maximum Sewice Vehicles Operated i n Maximum S ervice Spart Ratio Total Gallons Consumed ( 000) TAB LE JII -F3 Lynx (O rlan do ) Syste m Total Performance I ndicators 1987 1 988 1989 1 9 9 0 945.7 0 98 4 5 0 1 ,032 .64 1 ,072.75 nt o .,. nta 013 5 ,6 7 9 .&0 6 2 49 04 7 ,808.17 &,026. 79 n/ 3 34,380 00 3 8, 085.21 36.473.0 6 4,456 .30 4 ,484.13 4,503.33 5,132 .49 4 198.6 0 4 ,21 3 .07 4.293 .34 4 ,802.32 319-4 0 308.66 3 23 .95 366.9 9 297.40 300. 72 306 .9 t 345.57 .,. 649 0 0 689 .00 574 .00 $8, 1 4 7.10 $8, 8 1 9 .17 $ 1 0.304 $ 4 $12,216 .32 $7,373 29 $1 69 4 19 $&,621 .49 $ 9 730 .40 nlo n/a nt a $2,667. 0 2 nJa nlo nto $2,124.30 nJa nlo n l a $1,335 4 2 n! a n l a n!a $ 1 0,149 .50 nl a nta n/3 $ 4 6 64 0 1 nta n/a nla $4 ,183.95 n l a n/a n /a 2 66.40 n l a n ta 1 9 8 2 0 nta nlo nta 4 0 2 0 n/a n l o nla 2 8 00 1 5 7 00 153.0 0 15 7 0 0 102 .00 74 00 13.00 76.00 84. 0 0 1 t 2 \6% 109.59% 101.28% 21.43% nta '' n/3 1,36 1 6 7 1991 1992 Yt 1 9871 9 2 1 ,1 1 3.76 7 6 8.43 1 8 7 4% nt 3 3 79 .0 0 n l a 9 641.66 9 ,726.16 71.24/ t 37.2&3.34 4 7,865 .86 n l a 5 092 .52 6,058. 60 3 5 .96% 4 ,831. 5 3 5 693.84 3 5 6 1 % 371.39 44 0 .53 37. 9 2 % 3 50. 10 415.35 3 9 66% 569.00 574.00 n t a $13. 5.01 .31 $16, 6 2 6 17 1 0 4 ,07% I $ 1 0 1 77 .72 $ 12,001 .61 62 77% $3.121 91 $3 ,352 99 n / 3 $ 2 352 .3 5 $2,420 .36 n / a $5 473 09 $1,&65.66 n/a SH.214 6 2 $12 756 .83 n! a $5. 1 64 .59 $6, 0 14 0 6 n! a $4.083 ,12 $4 ,12 9 66 nla 281.90 330.30 n /a 202 .80 23 4 .20 n / a 48 6 0 58. 90 nla 30. 5 0 37. 2 0 n/ 3 1 02 00 1 22 00 2 2 2 9 % 88. 00 10 8 00 4$.95% 15 .91% 1 2 .9&% n t a 1,458.88 1,72 1 24 nla ---------129

PAGE 155

130 TABLE lll-F4 Lynx (Orlando) Directly Operalcd Motorbus EffctCiveness Measures E FFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1 990 1991 1992 S ERVICE SUPPL Y Vehicle Miles Per Capha 4 .S9 4 .4 6 4 30 4.78 4 57 7 88 7 t .67% SERVICE CONSUMPTION T tips Per 5 97 6 32 7 .55 7.48 8 .66.. 12.66., ,., 112.1&% Pnsen ger Trips Per Revenue Mile 1.36 1.50 1 .83 1.67 2.00 1.71 25.23% Passenger T1ips Per Revenue Hour 19 1$ 20.63 25.53 23.23 27.54 '1 23..42 22. 28% QUALITY OF SERVICE Ave r age Speed { R.M.IR.H.) 14.04 13 .93 13 94 13.90 13.80 ::1 i7 i .35% Average Age of Fleet (in years} 4 00 3 .2 0 4 .21 6 1 7 5 24 7.43 85.'75% N umber of Inciden ts 133 00 92.00 129 00 36.00 33.00 209.00 57 14'4 .. . Total Roadca l ls 950.00 398.00 420.00 337.00 330 00 498 .00 -47.58'/o Rovenue M iles Between I ncidents (000) 31.10 45 .2 6 33. 00 1 33.40 1 46.4 1 27.24 12.39% R evenue Miles Betwee n Roade.JIIs (000) 4.35 10 46 1 0.14 14 25 14.64 1t.43 162.62% AVAILA81 L ITY Revenue Miles Per Ro u t e MOO (000) 7 .08 7.13 7 .42 8.37 8.49 9.92 40 07%

PAGE 156

E FFECTIVENESS MEASURES S ERVICE SUPPLY Ve h icle Per Capi t a SERVICE CONSUMPT ION Passenger Trips Per Capita Passenger Trips Per Revenu e M il e Pass enge r Tr. ips P er Revenue Hou r QUALITY OF SERV ICE Average SpeOd {R.M.IRH.) Average Age of Flee! ( in year s) Numbe r of I n cidents 'rotal Reve nu-e M iles aetV,een I n cidents (000 ) Revenue Miles Between Roadc.ll!S (000) AVA ILABI LITY ReVenu e Mil es Per Route M ite (000) -----------TABLE lll-FS Lynx (Orlando) Purchased Mo t orbus Effectjveness Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 0.12 0 ,0 9 0 06 0.04 0 .02 0 ,01 0 6 1 0.46 0.37 13.7 1 1 2.67 8 60 2 2 .3 9 2 7 57 23.40 nla n!> n/a nla nla nla n/a n/a n /a n/a n/a n/a nla n / a n/3 n/a 0 .76 0.31 1 991 1992 %Change 19871992 n/a nla n/a n/a nla n /a n/a n/a n/a n /a n/a n/a n/a n / a n/a nla nla nla n/a n/a n/a n/a n /a n/ a nla n/a nia nla nla nla n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a nla nla n/a n/a n/a nla "" n /a n/ a -----------------111

PAGE 157

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY Vehicle M ile s Per Capita SERVICE CONSUMPTION Pnsenger Trip$ Per Capi1a Pusenger Trips Per Revenue M il e Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hou r OUAUTY OF SERVICE Avera.ge Speed (R M .JR.H.) Average Age of Fleet ( in years} Number of Incidents Total Roadcans Reven u e M il es Between I n cidents (000) Revenue Miles Betwee n Roadcalls {000) AVAILASIUTY Revenue Miles Per Roule Mile (000) 132 TABLE III-F6 Lynx (Orlando) System Total Effective n ess Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 4 71 4 55 4.36 4.78 6 01 6 .35 7.56 ... 7.48 1.35 1.4 8 1.82 1.67 19.10 20.78 25.44 23.23 \4.12 14.01 13.99 13.90 nla nla nl a 6.17 nla nla nla 36 .00' nla nla nla 337.00 nla n la nla 133.40 n/3 nla nla 1 4.25 nl a 6.49 6.23 8 37 -----------1991 1992 % 1987 2 .. .. 4 .57 7.88 67.32% .. . . . ,.,. I :, 8.66 / 1t.66 }':-!'' 110.75%, 1 .. 2 .00 1. 7 1 26.27% 27 54 ; . .. 23.42 ; "''. 22. 61% 13. 8 0 .. 13. 7 1 ( -2. 90% 5 24 7.43 nla 33. 00 .. 209 00 nla . .. . 330.00 498 00 nla 146.41 .. 27 24 n/a . 14.6<1 11.43 nla 8.49 9.92 .,. ----------------------------------

PAGE 158

EFFIC IENCY MEASURES COST EFFIC IENCY Operafl n g ExpMse Per, Capna Operati n g Expense Per P e tlk Vehic t e (DOD} < Opera ti ng Expe n se Per T r ip Opera l ing Expen s e Per Passenger M i le El
PAGE 159

134 EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFI CIENCY Opera tin g Expense Per Capita Opera tin g Expense P e r Peak Veh icle (000) Ope rating Expense Per Passenger Trip Operating Expense Per Passenger Mile Expense Per Revenue Mile Operaling Expense Per R eve nu e Hou r MaintenanC-4 Expe nse Per Reve n u e Mile Exp, Per Operating Exp. OPERATING RATIOS F are box l.ocal Reven u e Per Operating Expe nse Ope t aling Rovenue Per Operating Expens-e VEHICLE UTILIZATION Veh icie Miles Per Peak Vehicle (000) Veh icle Hours Per Peal: Veh icle (000) Revenue Mil&$ Per Vehide Miies Reven u e M iles Per Total Vehtcles (000) Revenue Hours Per Tot al VehiCles (000) lABOR PRODUCTIVITY R evenue Hours Per EmpJoyee (000) Passenger Trips Per Employee (000} ENERGY UT ILIZATION Vehicle Miles Per GaEon FARE Average Fare Purchased 1987 $0.17. $40 .74 $4 .24 nla $2.60 $58. 19 nl a n/a nla n /a n/a 28.23 1.18 0.56 0.96 0.04 n/a nl a n/a nla TABLE 111-FS Lynx (Orlando) Motorbus ffic icncy Measures 1988 $0.16 $52. 22 $6.90 $0.23 $3.17 $67.42 n/a nl a n/a nla nla 29.61 0 94 0.56 0.76 0.03 n/a nla n/a nla 1989 $0.06 $22.26 $ 5.08 $0.17 $1.67 $43 .65 n/ a nla nl a nta nla 21.52 0 .97 0.55 0.55 O.o2 n/a n/a n/a nla 1990 nta nlo nJ3 nlo n/a n/a n lo nla nla nta n/ a nla nt o nl;r 1 n/a nta nta n/o n/a nla 199 1 1992 n/a n/a > nla ,;-w ,_.(_ < ..._, n l o i :' nla .. n l a nia nla nla nla nl a . ., nla n/a nla n/a nlo ,_.r .. .. nta nla nla nia nla I n/a 'I -!_' nla nla nla nta nla n/a n/a nta 1 nla I n/a n la nla nla n/a nla .,_., . ... .. .,. nta I .-'': s. nla %Change 1987-1992 n/a nla nt. a nla nla nla nla n la nla n/a nl a nta n/a n/a nta nla nla n/o nta nla:

PAGE 160

EFF I CIENCY M EASURES COST EFFI CI EN CY Operating Expense Per Capita E x pense Per Peak Veh i cle {0 00} Operati n g expense Per Pass-en g er Tr" Operat ing Expense Per P asse n g e r Mile Operciling Expen s e Per Revenue Mil e Operatin g Expense P e r Revenue Hour Maintenance EJC:pense Per Revenue M ile Mai n t e nance Exp. Per Operating Exp. OPERA T I NG RATIOS F a rebox Recovery l ocal Reve n u e P e r O p erating Expense Operating Revenu e Per Operaling EXpense V E HICLE U T I LI ZATION Vehicle Miles Per Peak Ve h i c l e {000) Vehicle H o urs P o r Peak Ve hicle { 000) Revenue Miles Per Vehae Miles Reven ue Miles Pe r T o t a l Vehicles { 000 ) Revenue Hour s Per Total VehiCles { 000) lABOR PROOUCliVI T Y Revenue Hours Per Employee (000) Passenger Trips Per Em p t oyee (000 ) ENERGY UTILIZATION Vehicie M iles Pet Ga-llo n FARE Ave r age Fa r e TABLE III F9 L y n x (Orl:>ndo) Sys t em Tota l Efficiency Measures 1 987 1988 1989 $8 6 1 $8 .96 $9. 98 $110 10 $120.81 $132 .11 $1.43 $1.41 $1.32 n/ a $0 .26 $0. 27 $1. 94 $2.09 $ 2 .40 $27.39 $29 .33 $33.58 n/ a n /a n/ a n/ a n /a n/a nla n /a n/a n/ a n /a nla nia nta n / a 60 22 61.43 57. 73 .32 < .23 4 .15 0 .94 0.94 0 9$ 26. 74 27 .54 2 7.35 1 .89 1 97 1 .9 5 n/a n/ a nla n/a nta n/a n ta n/ a n /a nta o1a n /a 199 0 1 99 1 1992 1987 2 $11 .39 $12.13 S2 1.64 151.15% s 145.43 $ 153. 49 $153 .95 39.83% $1.52 $1.40 $ 1. 7 1 $0.33 $0 .36 $0. 3 5 n / a S2 .5 4 suo $2. 9 2 5 0 48% $35.3 5 $38.58 $40.0 3 46.12% S0 .56 $0 65 $0.5 9 nl a 2 1 63 % 23. 1 1 % 20 17% n/;) 34.25% 30.23% 25.<4% n/ a &3.08% 83 03% 76.73% n / a 38.18% 38.24% 36.17% n / a 61.10 57.87 56.10 6.85% 4.37 4.22 4 08 50% 0 .94 0 95 0 94 0 25% 47 .08 4 7 .37 46.67 74,52% 3 .39 3 43 3.40 79. 73% 1 .30 1.2 4 1.26 nta 30.13 34.20 29 4 5 nla 3.77 3.49 3 .52 .,. S0. 52 $0 42 $0. 43 n/a .... 135

PAGE 161

GENf:RAL QUESTIONS I Were any fare changes made during fiscal ]'ear 1992'? If so please provide the previo us fare s tructure as well as the upd ated far e structure and indicate whe n the changes w ere implemented No changes wer e made. 2 Were t11cre any signH"icanl changes in service/service area dur)ng fisca l I 992? Fixed-route service on two maj or corridors was incr e ased. Head ways were r ed uced and were interlined to improve. overall operating rimes. Some routes wc.re adjusted to provide "lifeline" serv i ce to economically-depressed communities No s ignificant new routes were introduced during FY 1992. 3 Have there been any recent changes or significant events that may he l p explain the pe r fomla nce of the transit system'? 136 lYNX embatked on a sig nificant marketing program to raise awareness of pub lic uanspona1ion in FY 1992 This prog ram included bus painting, contests, adve rtising ;md asson ed promotionttl programs

PAGE 162

QUEST IONS ABOU T 1992 SICCTIO N I S DATA 1 Passenge r miles i ncreased at a g r e at er rat e 1 ha n d i d p a s s enger tr i p s f rom I 991 t o J 99 2 Thi s resu lt e d i n a 27 i n crease i n a v erage t rip le n g t h a s ind icate d i n t h e tabl e b elow. Is t he r e an e x p l a nati on? Directly-Operated M otorb u'S FY 1 9 9 1 FY 1 992 ; P.z,ss enger T rip s 9 .641 .660 9 7 26,160 I Passen ger M lf e s 3 7.283,340 47,865,860 Averag e Trip leng th 3 .87 m il e s 4 .92 miles I S y s t e m Resp o n se: No exp l a n a tio n c o u l d b e p r ovide d f o r t h e i n c r ease i n average trip len gth. 2 T h e n umber of veh i cle m iles re venue m iles, veh i c l e ho u rs, a n d r eve nue h ours all i nc reased signific a n tl y f rom 1991 1 0 1992 {see tabl e b el ow), as did t h e num ber of vehicles avail able f o r a n d o perated in m aximum ser\ice. P le a s e e xp lain t his incr e a s e i n se r vice ( s ee also questio n # 2 on rhe surve y f or m) D i rec tly-Operate d Motorbus FY 1 991 FY 1992 o/. C h ange Vehi cle M ile s $, 092, 5 2 0 6 ,058,600 <9. 0 % Reve n u e M iles 4.831 ,530 5 ,693 .940 1 7 ,$% Vehicle Hours 3 7 1,39 0 440,530 18.6% R e v e n u e Hou rs 3 5 0 ,100 4 1 $ ,3$0 18 6 % I Vchs. Avait. f o r M ax SetVice 1 0 2 122 19.6% Ve hs Oper. i n M a x S e tvicc a s 1 0 8 22.7% System Resp-on s e : A s disc ussed in quest i onll2 i n l he Gen era l Ques ti o n s sectio n L YNX i nc reas e d its fixed r o ut e s e rvice. lrl additio n LYNX 1<:-;tsc d additio n al v e hicles in F Y 1992. 3. To tal operat i n g e xpense increased f r o m S13.S07,3l 0 i n l 9 9 1 to S 1 6 ,626, l 7 0 i n 1 99 2, a n i ncrease of approxinm t c l y 2 3 p e r cent. I s t h i s inc rease sole l y
PAGE 163

System Response: No significant capita l p urchases were made in FY 1992 Parts, suppo11 equipment, and miscellaneous items were t h e only purchases made. 5. Operating revenue increased 16 percent from $5, 164 ,590 in 1991 to $6,014,080 in 1992 and total locol revenue increased 14 percent from Sll,214,620 in 1991 to S 12.156.830 in 1992. Both increases occurtcd despite only a four percent i ncrease in passe nger fare revenue . Please explain the inc reases in Op-er ating r evenue and total l ocal revenue. System Response: YNX indicates that t h ese increases wer e due to increased local fun ding in F Y 1992. 6. Sig n ificant increases occurred in the number of employees in each of the employee categories resulting in a 17 per ce n t increase i n total etnployees (see tab l e bel ow) Did these increases result f rom the increase in service mentioned p revious ly? Oircetly.Operated Motorbus FY 1 991 FY 1992 %Change Opera,ting Employe-es 202 6 234 2 15 .5% M a in t e nance E mployees 48.6 56.9 21.2% Adm inistrative E m ployees 30. 5 3 7.2 22.0% Total Empl oye e s 261.9 330.3 17 2% System Response: The changes in the employment c-ategories <:an be attributed to t he increase in fixed-route service that occurred during FY 1992. 7 T otal gallons co nsumed increased Crom 1,458 ,880 gallons in 1991 t o 1 ,721,240 gallons in 1 992, an 1 8 pe-rcent increase. Can t his increase in f u e l usage be so l ely attr ibuted t o the increase i n service. or is t here some other explanation? System Response: Fuel consumption also increased as a result of t he increase in fixed route service. 8. TI1e average age of the vehicle fleet increased (rom 5 24 year s in 1991 t o 7.43 years in 1992, an increase or 42 percent. f( appears that t he increase in fleet size mentioned previousl y resulted from t h e additio n of o ldet vehicles Please e -xplain. System ResJJOnsc: LYNX leased 10 fixed.route ve-hi cles in F Y 1 992. The vehicles were leased as an interim solution since LYNX had purchased a number of fixedroutc vehi cles that were not bein g delivered until ea rly FY 1993. TI1c leased vehicles w e r e used for expanded fixed-route service. 9. l1 1 e n u mber o f incidents increased significa ntl y from 33 i n 1991 to 209 in 1992. Given the unpredictability of these events, are there any possibl e reasons for t h i s i n c rease? 138 System R e sponse: The definition of"inc-idents i n L YNXs opetal iOns department was changed to improve reporting met h ods. Incidents now reflect any si tuation t h ai is abnonnal. The previous definition reflected i nc idents that required written action only.

PAGE 164

10. TI1enumber ofroadcalls increased more 1han SO percent f rom 330 in 1991 to 498 in 1992. Is t here an explanati o n f or this increase? System Response: The definition of .. roadcalls" was also changed to improve reporting methods. Ro<1dcalls arc now defined as any occurrence w h ere any ons ite assistance i s nccde
PAGE 165

... 0 i'" 1--1 1-1+ 1 --1---f 1-!--!4 1-f!+-+ HI--"\..... I\ . I ..... f-' I 1 !r f-i 1 v '\ I : I I i 2 I ff H H H '""\\ I H \\J f-'J' 1 \ '\. rl -: 6 \ l I i.l I .\ iffi J II ' I I I ld '-' i I w g : 1 I I "' !" 0 0 8 0 0 - -- - - -i1 i ;; - -"' 0 ;; c: $ -,. $= -. .,. ,., I c: .. -0 0 0 --.Y -"' 0 0 0 "' 8 0 ? 8 0 v '\. I i'\. -0 0 0 -r ... -< n z 0' X 0 :l:;o -r .. )> z o c 01 0 -

PAGE 166

L Y N X (O R L AN DO) 8 0 6 0 4.0 2.0 0 0 Figure lll F8 Vehicle Miles Per Capita .... --+-n 1 9SS 1 986 ISJ) 19U 19$9 1,0 1991 1"1 Effectiveness Measul'es Figure IIJ.fg T rips Per Revenue Mile 2.0 1.6 1": 6 I -l _I..,J,-..:1 7 "J 2 "i -1 .8 I i I---1--=-j 1 2 0.8 o 0.0 \'Jt4 IUS t9U 1'JI1 198$ 1H9 19'J O 1H1 Figure III F10 Avera g e Age of Fleet (years} 8.0[ I' 4.0 o + ;:LU_ H.) l ( I o(l.ook .. "-""IN M!O(o\."' .;,, 1 -1=F=F tU4 1tsS n u t s.s7 '"* nn 1 990 '"' t?n Figure lll f11 Revenue Miles Bet wee n Accidents/Incidents Figure IIIF12 Revenu e M iles Between RoadcaH s 150.000 v --ts.ooo 120.000 12.000 9<1,000 9,000 60,000 1-6.000 -.. --; !="4 ---r=-r-30,000 :. : ._. L_J .. _ 1 _ _t _ 1 j. ) 3,000 0 ''" uas un ,,., 19U nu t?90 Utt '"1 ,,.._. t?tS ttt6 "" , .. un '"o '"' '"' 141

PAGE 167

142 Figure lllf13 Operating Expens e Per Capita $25.001 . S20 .00 J _.i S1S.OO L..J s1o.ook.:J r -1._ .. tt.t ss.oo SO.OO '''' tus t9f6 ,,., ,, ,. ,,., uto ,,, un Figure III-F16 Maintenan
PAGE 168

LYNX SUMMAIIY It is evide nt from the. da t a that t h e amount of service prov id..:d by LYNX increased significant l y be t ween 1991 and 1992. Vehicle miles i ncreased 19 pe r cent, revenue rni l es inc reased 18 percent bot h vehicle hours and revenue h ours inc reased 1 9 percent, and the numbe r of vehicles available for and operated in maximum service increased 20 and 23 percent . respective l y These increases re s u lted from the addit i o nal fixedroute serv i ce provided by LYNX on two of its major corr i dors and the adju stment o f several rou t e s to provide tifeline se r v i ce t o econom i cally-depressed communities I n addition, LYNX leased addi tional vehicles i n fY 1 992 Tota l operntin,g expense increased 23 per cent from S 1 3 ,507, 310 in 1991 to S 1 6,626,170 i n 1992. L VNX cites the incre a se jn fixedr o ute se r v i ce u s the reason tOr increased operating expe nses. Total l ocal re venue increaSI.'tl 14 per cent from $11,2 I 4,620 in 199 I to $ l 2 756,830 i n 1 992, p r i mar i l y d \Je to a 16 percen t increase in opemting reven u e ($5,164,590 in $6 .014.080 in 1992). According to LYNX, these i n c r eases we1 e d u e to increased local funding in FY 1992. To t a l emp l oyees increased t7 percent from 281.9 FTEs in 1991 t o 330.3 FTEs in 1992 d u e to s i g n ificant i nc r eases in each of LYNX' s employee LYNX attributed the changes i n the emp loyment categories to the increa s e in lixed8route serv ice that occurred duri1lg t h e 1 992 fiscal yea r The number of inci dents inc r eased s i gnificant l y from 33 incidents i n 199 L to 209 incidents in 1992. L Y N X indicates that this )ncrcilse res u llcd from a cha n ge in t he operations department's defi n ition of incide n ts." The definition was expanded to improve report methods. The nunlbc r of roadcal l s i n creased approxim i t t c l y 5 1 percent from 330 roadca11s in 199 I t o 498 rondcnlls in 1992. Simi l ar to case for incide nts, the definition of roadcall s was a l so modified to i mprove report i ng me1h ods It is this expanded definition t hat LYNX be lieves r esulted i n t h e i n\:rtase in roadcalls 143

PAGE 169

G. P A L M BEACH COUN T Y TRANSPORTATION AUTHO RITY SYSTEM PROFILE Organ i7..ational Structure .. Palm Beach Count y Transportation Author it y is owne d by Palm Beach County. However the system manageme-nt and empl oyment are provided under contract by Florida Tra nsit Management. Inc. Governing Body and CompositionTh e five-member Pal m Beach County Board of Co u n t y Commi ssioners ove rsees the transit sy stem a n d must approve PBCT's budget as well as major proj ec t s undertaken by the syste-m. Service An::t PBCT provides t ransit services to Palm Beach County, Modes. Directly --operated mode s include fixtdrout e motorbus servit(S and feeder bus services for theTri County Commuter Rail system. Originally, t he feed e r bus service was co ntract ed out to National T ransit Setvic-es,lnc however the Pal m Beac h County Board of County Commissioners, through major ity vote, terminated t he tontract o n Sept ember 1 2 1990. In addition to these d ir ecdy o p erated modes, PBCT a l so provides p urchased demand-respo nse services under contract wit h Palm Beach Coun1y Parammsit. 1 44

PAGE 170

P ERFORMANCE I NDICATORS Sel'l;ce Atea (000) Service Are Siz.e (sqvar e miles) Trips (000) Passenger Miles (000) Miles {000) t ... > . Revenue Mi'.oes (000) Ve hicle Ho urs (000) Reven u e t-l o u r s (000) Rovle Mites T ota l Oper alflg E xpense (000) Total Operating e;Pense of. 1984 $) Total Mai nte na nce Expe nse (000) T o t a l Maintcnancl) Expense ( 000 of 1984 $) . ; .. Total Capital E x pense (000) T o tal Revenu e (000) Operating R e venue (000) Passenger Fare Revenues (000) Total Employees Tr a nsportation Operating Empl oyees Mainte n a nce E m p l oyees Administrative .. EmplOyees Ve hide, s Available tor Maximum Service Vehicres in Maxi mum Service $p;1re Tota l Ga llons Co n s u med (000 ) --------TABLE IIIGI Palm Be ac h County Transportat ion Authorit)' DirccelyOpcntcd Motorbus Performance Indicators 19 8 7 1988 1 989 1 99 0 789 5 0 831 .10 865. 5 1 863,52 nla n/a nla n la 2 ,432.60 2,274 .72 2 ,091.56 2 213 1 9 1 6 ,332. 90 1 3 ,840.03 1 3,486 .33 15 ,190 .25 ' 2 556.00 2,480.60 2 4 7 3 22 2, 529.02 2 282 60 2 189 90 2 1 65.47 2 1 90 1 7 149.50 1 49 26 147 17 153.92 139.70 138.90 137 00 141.96 401.0 0 401.00 329 00 390.70 $5,903 90 $5, 791.72 $6, 207 .59 $6,869 ,68 $5,343.15 $5,05 2 .92 S5, 1 93 7 0 $5 471.76 $1, 245 ,72 $1,177. 3 4 $ 1 334 16 $1,463.86 $ 1 ,127 40 $1, 027 1 6 $ 1 ,116 27 $1, 18 1 .91 $613.90 $44. 1 1 $4-47 .il7 $7,042.84 $ 4 23 2. 2 2 $4,182 8 2 $4,764 63 $5 938. 7 0 $ 1, 592 ,77 $1,614 6 5 $ 1 ,7 1 8 5 0 $ 1, 79 6 .01 $ 1, 065 68 $ 1.048.04 $ 1, 045 68 $ 1 ,069. 94 1 26,10 128.00 124.90 128. 1 0 6 1.20 83. 00 80.00 82, 1 0 26.40 25 7 0 24.70 25 20 18 .50 1 9. 3 0 20.20 20 .80 78 .00 60 00 59.00 74 .00 45 .00 44.00 44 0 0 61.00 73. 33% 36.36% 34 .09% 21.31% 561.10 550.47 553 .68 5 8 1. 5 2 1991 1992 %Cha nge 1 987 1992 883.04 775 .34 1. 79% n / a 555. 00 nta 2,712 ,88 2 ,7 1 2 .88 1 1. 52% 17,190.10 17 190, 1 0 5.25% 3,147.48 3 1 70.82 24.05% 2 491 .77 2 ,645. 55 15. 9 0 % 192 ,51 194.1 4 29.86% 171,09 178.07 27 .47"A 390.80 434 9 0 8.45% $8,5 09.01 $8,488 .07 43.77% $$,411 5 1 $6 127 ,11 14.67% $ 1 ,798.17 $1.851.33 4&. 6 1 % $ 1,354,92 $1, 336.38 1 6 .5 4% $727.60 $911.01 48 40% $6,473.39 $6 146.26 4$,27% $2 ,063.56 $ 2 ,3 1 3 65 4-5.26% $ 1 ,178 70 $1,400 .56 29.00% 146.60 157 70 25. 06% 106.20 118.<0 4$. 8 1 % 30.20 29. 3 0 1 0 98% 10 20 1 0 0 0 95% 74.00 73, 0 0 6 4 1 % 56.00 60.80 33,33 % 27, 59% 2 1 .67% n /a 771.55 780 .23 39. 05% 145

PAGE 171

PERFORMANCE I NDICATORS Service Area P opvlatkln {000) Service Area Size (square miles) Passenger Trips (000 ) Passenge r Miles (000) Vehicle Miles (000) Reve n ue Mi'es (000) Ve hicle Hours (000) Reven u e Hou r s ( 000) Route Miles Total Operat ing Expense (000) Total Operating Expen.se (000 of 1 984 $} Total M
PAGE 172

PERFORMANCE I NDICATO R S Servi c e A r ea Populalion (000) Service Area S ize (square mOOs) Passenger Trips {000 ) Passenger Miles (000 ) Ve hicle Miles (000) .,.., .. Reven u o Miles (000 ) Vehicle Hou r s (000) Revenue Hour s (000) Ro u le Miles Tot<'l.l Ooeratlng E)(pense (000} Tot3l Operating Expense (00 0 of 1984 $) Total Mainten3 nce E_xpense (000} Total M a intenance Expense (000 0 1 19 8 4 $ } Tolal Capital Expense (000) T o lal Local Revenue (000) Operating Revenu e (000) Passenger Fare Revenues {000) Total Employees Tran$portalion Operating Empk>yces MaL'llenance Employees Administrative Employees Vehicles Avaitab}e t o t Maximum Service Vehicles Ope(ated in Ma ximum Service Spare Ratio Total Gallons Consumed (000 ) TABLE 111-G3 Paint Htllth County TranS(JQr1ation Authority System Tot a l Performance Indicators 1987 1988 1989 1990 789.50 831.10 865.51 863.52 nla n/a nla nla 2 432 60 2 274.72 2, 14 8 .08 2,386.63 16 332 90 13,840.03 13, 625 .36 16, 012 .74 2 558.00 2,480 .80 2,728 98 3 216. 3 5 2 282 60 2 189. 90 2,318 2 2 2.554 .58 1 4 9.50 149.2 6 166.43 1 90.55 139 .7 0 138 90 153.31 17 0 .16 401 .00 401.00 403 .0 0 474 ,20 $5 903 .90 55,791.72 $6, 957 09 57, 983 96 $5.343.15 55, 052 92 $5,820. 78 56,359.30 $ 1 245 72 S \ ,177.34 n la nla $1,127.40 5!,027.16 nta 5613 90 544.11 n la nla $4,232 2 2 $4,182 62 n la nla $1.592 .77 $ 1 614 .65 n l o $ 1, 085.68 $1, 048 04 n la nla 1 2 6 10 1 28 .00 n la nla 81.20 83.00 nla nl a 26.40 25 70 n l a nla 18.50 19 .30 nla nla 7 8 00 60.00 78. 00 93.00 45.00 44.00 57.00 7 6 .00 73 .33% 36.36% 36.84% 22 .37% 561.10 550.47 n/a nla 1991 1 992 % C h ange 1987-1992 883.04 775 .34 .79% n / a 555 00 nla 2 712 .88 2,712.88 11.52% 1 7 190 1 0 1 7, 1 90. 1 0 5 25% 3 147.46 3,1 7 0.82 24 .05% 2,49 1 77 2 645 .55 15.90% 19 2 5 1 1 9 4 14 29.86% 171.09 178.07 27 4 7 % 390 .80 434.90 8.45% $8,509.01 $8, 486.07 43. 77% $.6 ,411.51 $6,127.11 14 .67% $1,798.17 $1,85 1 .33 48 61% 51,354 92 $1,336 .38 18.54% 572 7.60 5911.0 1 48.40% $6,473.39 56, 1 4 6 28 4 5 27% 52.063 .56 $2, 313.65 45.26% $1,176 70 51,400.58 29.00% 146. 6 0 157 70 25. 06% 1 06 20 118.40 45 8 1 % 30. 20 29 .30 1 0 .98% 10. 20 10 .00 -45. 95% 74 00 13.00 .41 % 58. 00 60.00 33. 33% 27 59% 21.61% " 771.55 780 .23 39. 05% 147

PAGE 173

E FFECTIVENESS MEASURES S E R VICE SUPPLY Vehicle Miles Per CapHa S E R VICE CONSUMPTION Trips Per Capita Passenger Trips P e r Reven u e Mi1e Pus.enger Per Reve n u & Hout OUAUlY O F SERVICE Average S peed (RM.IR.H.} Average Age o f Flee t (in year s) Number of Incidents Total RoadC311s Reve n ue Mies Betwee n l ncideniS (000} R e venue M iles Between Roadcans ( 0 00) AVAli..ABlLITY Revenue Miles Per Ro u te Mile (000) 148 TABLE Jll-G4 Palm Beach County TranS:J10r1atio n Authority Motorbus Effectivene ss Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 3.24 2 98 2 .86 2 93 3 08 2.74 2.42 .. 2 .56 1.07 1. 04 0 .97 1.0 1 17 .41 1 6 .38 1 5.27 _. 15 .59 1 6 .34 15.77 15.81 15.43 7.60 7.10 8 1 2 4 16 173 .00 102.00 90.00 -10 00 8 1 1.00 792 .00 782.0 0 753. 00 1 3 1 9 21.47 24 .06 219.02 2 .81 2.77 2.77 2.91 5 69 5.46 6 .58 5 .6 1 1991 1992 % Chanie 1 987-19 2 ., 26 32% 3.56 < 4 09 I 3 07 ;-< 3.50 13.56% ... 1.09 1.03 -3 78 % .. 15:23 l 2 .5l%' 1 5 .86. .,_,....., 1 4.56 1 4.86 9 07 % 5 1 6 6 .0 8 -20.00% < 2.00 21.00 -87.86% .. .. 767 .00 830.0 0 2 .34% 1, 245.89 125.98 -854.80% 3.25 3.19 1 3 .25% . 6 .38 6 08 6 .87%

PAGE 174

EF F ECTIV ENES S M EASUR E S SERVIC E S U PPlY . Veh i cle M iles C apil a .. "' . S E RVIC E CONS UMPTIO N P assenge r Trips P er Cap i t a > . .. .. Pas.senge r Trips P er R e v e n u e Mile . Pass en ger rrips Per R even u e Hou r Q UAliTY O F S E RVIC E Speed (R.M.IR, H ) Average Age o f Fleet ( in y e a rs) Number o f I ncident s R o sd c ans Rov e n ue Maes Between I ncident s {0 00} Revenu e Miles Betw e e n RoadC
PAGE 175

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY Vehicle Miles Per Capila SERV ICE CONSUMP T I ON Passenger Trips Per Capita P a sse n ge r Trips Per Revenue Pas$e n ger T r i ps P e t R e ven u e Ho u r QUALITY OF S E RVICE Average S pe ed ( R.M.IR.H. } Average Age of Fleet {In ye3rs) Numbe r of Incidents Tol a l Roadcalls Revenue. Miles Between Incidents (000) Revenue MiJes B etwee n Roadcalls (000) AVAILAB I LITY Revenue Miles Per Route Mile (000) -----------------------------150 TABLE III G6 Palm Beac-h County Transportation Authority System Tota l Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 3 .24 2 .98 3. 1 $ 3.n 3.08 2 .74 2 .48 2.76 1.07 1.04 0.93 0 .93 1 7.41 1 6 .38 14.01 14 .03 16 .3 4 15.77 15 12 15. 0 1 7.60 7.10 n la n ta 173.00 102 .00 n/a nta 811 .00 7 92.00 nla n/a 13.19 2 1.47 n /a n/a 2 8 1 2 .77 nta n/a 5.69 5 .46 5 .75 5 .3 9 199 1 1992 % Chane 1987 1 9 2 3 .56 4 .09 26.32 % 3 .07 3.50 1 3.56% 1. 0 9 1.03 -3.78% 15 .86 15 .23 -12.51% 14.56 14.86 ..g.o7(1/o 5 1 6 6.08 -20.00% 2 .00 21.00 -87.88% 767 .00 830.00 2.34% 1,245.89 12 5 .9 8 854. 80% -3 .25 3 19 13.25% 6 .38 -6.08 6 87%

PAGE 176

EFFI C I E NCY MEASURES COST E FF I CIENCY Opemtlng Expense Per Capit a Operat i n g Expens-e Per Pea k Ve h ide (000} Operating Expense Per P assenger Ttlp >, Operating Ex pe nse P er Passenger Mile Ope rating Expense Per Mile Operating Expense Pe r Rovtn ue Hou r Maint ena nc e Ex pense Per Reveni1e Mile M a i ntencmce EJICp, Per Ope r aling E xp OPERATING RATIOS F arebox RecoverY loC<'ll Revenue Pet Operating E xpense Operat ing Reve n ue P e r Oper3ting Expense V E HICLE UTILIZATION Vehicle Miles P e r Peak Veh icl e (000) Vehicl e Ho u rs Per P eak Vehicle (000) Rc"enuc Miles Per Vehicle M ile s Revenue Mi tes Per T ota l Vehic l es (000 ) Re'Ven ue Hours Per Tot3 1 Veh i cles (000) LABOR PRODUCTIVITY Revenue Hou rs Pe r Empl oyee (000) P3ss.enge r Tr ips Per Emp l oyee (000) ENERGY UTIL I ZATION Ve h icle M iles Per Gallon FARE Avera g e F a r e TABLE 111-G7 l'alm Dtach County Transportation Authority OirccOy-Opcr:tted Motorbus Efficient)' 1987 1988 1989 1990 $7.48 56.97 $7.17. $7.96 $131.20 $ 1 3 1.63 5 141 .08 51 1 2 .62 $2.43 52.55 $2.97 $3.10 $0.36 $0.42 $0.46 $0.45 $2.59 S2. 64 $2.87 $3.14 $42.26 $41.70 $45. 3 1 $48.39 $0.55 $0.54 $0.62 $0.68 21. 10% 20.33% 21 .49% 2 1 .60% 18.39% 18.10% 16.85% 15.87% 71.69% 72.22% 76.7$% 26.98% 27.88% 27.68% 26.1-1% 56.80 56.38 S6.Z1 41.46 3.32 3 .39 3 .34 2 .52 0 .89 0.88 0.88 0.87 29.26 36.SO 36.7 0 29.60 1.79 2 .32 2 .32 1 9 2 1.11 1,09 1.10 1, t 1 19.29 17.17 16.7 5 17.28 4.56 4 5 1 4.47 4 .35 S0.45 SO.A6 $0.50 $0.49 1 991 1 992 Change 1987-1992 $9.64 $10.95 46.40% $146.71 $141..47 7 .83% $3.14 $3. 1 3 28.92% $0.49 $0. 49 36.60% $3. 41 $3. 21 24. 05% $49.73 547.67 1 2 .79% $0.72 $0.10 28.23% 2 1. 13% 21 .81% 3.37% 13. 85% 16. 50% .10 21% 1 76.0811/o 72.43% 1 .05% 24.25% 27.26% 1 .04% 54.Z7 52.85 -6.96% 3 32 3 .Z4 2 6 1 % 0 79 0 .83 .57% 33.67 36. 24 23.84% 2 .31 2 44 36.20% 1 1? 1 13 1.92% 18.51 1 7 .ZO -10.SZ% 4.08 4.06 -10.79% $0.43 $0. 52 15.68% i 151

PAGE 177

E F FICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Operaling Expense Per Capita Operating 8cpen s e Per Peak Vehi cle (000) Operat i ng Expense Per Passenger T rip O p e r ating E xpense Per Passenger Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile Oper3ti n g Expense Per Revenue H o u r Mainte n a n ce Ex pense P e r R evenue MiCe Maintenance Exp. Per Operating Exp. OPERATING RATIOS Farebox Recovery l ocal Reve n u e Per O p e rating Expense Operat.iflg Revenue Per Operatiog Expense VEHICLE UTILIZATION Vehic le Mi'.es Pe_, Peak Vehic l e (000) Vehi c l e Hours Per Pe3k Vehic l e (000) Revenue Miles Per Veh icle Mi!e s Revenue M i les P e r To!a l VehiCles (000) Revenue Hours Per Tota l Vehicles (000} LA80R PROOUCTIVlTY Revenue Hou rs Per E m ployee (000) Pa-ssenger Trips Por Employee (000) ENERGY UTILIZATION Vohicle Milos Per GaJon FARE Average F a r e 152 TABLE lll-G8 Palm Beach County Transportation Authority Purchased Motorbus Efficie ncy Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 n/o nla $0 .87 $1.29 n/o n/a $57.65 $74 29 nla nla $ 1 $ 26 : .. $6.42 nl a n/a $5 .39 $1.35 .. nla nla $4.9 1 $3. 06 nla n/o $45 96 539.52 nla nla nla nla nla n la n l a nla nla nla n/a n/ a nla nla nla nla nla nla n l a ". n/a nla nl a 19 67 45 .32 n/ a nla 1.48 2A4 n/a nla 0.60 O.S3 n/a n l a 3.04 19. 1 8 nla nla 0 .86 1 48 n/a n la n/a n/a. n/a n l a n/a nla nla .. riTa '"'. n/a nla s '. nta nla n la n/a -------------1991 1992 % 1989-19 2 n/a nla nla ' _.-,.,,' > nla nla nl a . ' .. .. .. n/a n/a ,.;t. n/a nlo n/a nla .. ' nla . nla nl a n/a nla ,, . ... > nla n/a nla nla nla nla ... ' nfa > "')<-' ,' . nla > nla ' .,_ nla nla nla ... .. }' nta nJa nla nlo ri/ a . nla nla nla nla nla nla nla _,( nla n/a nla n la n/a nfa . . ._, I > --,. ,_ nla i "-' . nla nla nla ,$_:,n,a ' _(,...,) : 'f"' ii nla ..-:'' nla ,. . $ -V' '' ._._< <' < --; .w; . nla ,. "' -. --*' ,_, ri/a n/a '. '.

PAGE 178

EFFIC I ENCY MEASUR E S COST E FFIC I ENCY Operating Expense Pei Ca.pila O per a ting Ex.pense P er Peak Vehicle ( 000) .Per T r i p Operating Ex pe nse Per Passe n ge r Mite Operating Ex p e nse Pe r Revenue Mile Operating l(pense Per Revenue Hou r . . .... , 1 expense Per Mil o Maintenance E xp Per fl(p, OPRATING RATIOS Farebox local Revenue P C f Oper3tlng Expense Operat ing Revenue Pe r .Operating Exp ense V E HICLE UTILIZATION ... .. ' ' Vehk:le Miles Per Vehicle (000) Ve hicJe Hour s Per P eak Vehicle (000 ) Reve n ue Miles Ptr VehiCle Mites Revenue Miles Pe r Total Vehicles (000) Revenue Ho urs POr To;al Vehlcres ( 000) lABOR PROOUCTMTY r.tevenue Hours Pe r Empbyee {000) Passenger Trips P e r Empl oyee (000) E NERGY U TILIZATIO N Vehic l e Mi l es Per Gallon FA RE Ave r age Fare TABLE Ill-G9 Palm Beach County Transportation A u thority System Tota l Efficiency Measures 1987 1988 1989 1 990 $7.48 $6.97 $8.04 $9.25 $131 .20 $131 .63 $1 2 2 .05 $105 .05 $2.43 $2.55 $3 .24 $3.35 $0.36 $0.42 $0. 5 1 $0.50 $2.59 $2.64 $3 .00 $3.1 3 $42 .26 $41.70 $45 .38 $46 .92 $0.55 $0.54 n1a nla 21.10% 20.33% n1a n/3 1 8 .39 % 18.10% n/a n1a 71.69% 12.22% n/a n1a 26.98% 27.88% nl3 n/a 56.80 56.38 47.88 42.32 3.32 3 .39 2 .92 2 5 1 0 .89 0 .88 0 .85 0.79 29.26 36.50 2 9 72 27.47 1 .79 2 .32 1 .97 1.83 1.11 1.09 n/a n/a 19 .29 1 7 .77 nia nla 4.56 4 .51 nia nl3 $0.45 $0.46 nia nla -------------------------1 991 1992 %Change 1987-199 2 $9.64 $10 .95 46.40% $ 146. 7 1 $ 1 4 1 .47 7 .83% $3.14 $3. 1 3 28.92% $0.49 $0 .49 36. 60% $3. 4 1 $3 2 1 24.0$% $49.73 $47 .67 1 2 79% $0. 72 $0.70 28.23% 21.13'/o 21.8 1% 3.37% 1 3 .85% 16. 50% 10 27% 76 .06% 72.43% 1 05% 24.25% 27.26% 1 04% 5<.27 52.85 -6. 96% 3 .32 l 24 2 61% 0.79 0 .83 -6.57% 33.67 36.24 23.S4% 2.31 2.44 36.20% 1 .17 1.13 1.92% 18.51 1 7 .20 .82% 4 .08 4 .00 .79% $0.43 S0.52 15.68% 1 53

PAGE 179

GENERALQUESTIONS 1. Were :my fare changes made dur i ng fiscal )'ear 1992? If so, J)lease provide the previous fare s t ruc ture as well as the updatC
PAGE 180

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTION 15 DATA Directly-Opcrntcd Motorbus Questions 1. As indicated in t he table -bel ow, the numbe r of revenue miles increa s ed at a greater rate t han did the number of \'eh iclem i l e s, whi c h re-suhed in a decrease in the number of deadhead miles between 1991 and 1992. Please exp l ain how this improvement in deadhead mileage was ach ieved. D i rectly-Operated Motorbus FY 199 1 FY 1992 %Chang e Vehicle M i les 3 14 7 ,480 3 ,170 .820 0 .7% Revenue M il e s 2 491 ,770 2 645,550 6 .2% System Response : Vehicle miles is a produ c t of the sum of all miles o perated by the buses. As such it is basi citlly odometer mi les. Revenu e miles ar c d e rive d from ,, system's sc h e dule for t r a ns it service This is more o r l ess om apples ver sus oranges compar i son w h ere one statis tic may not have any bear ing on t h e other 2. The n umber of directional rout e mi les inc reased from 390 8 i n 1991 to 4 34 9 in 1992, a n increase of II per ce nt. P lease e xplain t his increas e System Respon se : Tiu: i nception of two new routes (22 nnd SE/8\V) a n d t h e restructuring or some existing rOuleS ;tccountcd for t he inc;re; t s c i n one-way directional rotlte miles i n FY l 992 3 Toli.ll capita l expense i ncreased approximately 25 per c ent from $727,600 in 199lto $9 11,010 i n 1992. What capihll purchases were nHtd e in 1991? In 1992? System Response: No explanat ion w;,1s provided for the increase in tota l capital expense. 4. P;.\ssenger fhr e revenue in<:rei'lsed a lmost 19 percent from $1 178>700 i n 1991 tO $ 1 ,400 580 i n 1992 d e s pite n o change i n the number of pass enge r trips dur i ng this tim e (2,712 880 in both 1991 and 1992 due to t rip samp l ing wni ver for FY 1 992 ) This resulted in an increase in average fare per p:tssenger tri p from $0.43 in 1991 to $0.52 i n 1 992 To what can the increase in pa:;scnger fare revenue be. attributed? Systen1 Response: The reason for t h e dras tic i n c r ease in passenger fare r evenue between FY 1991 a n d FY 1992 was a far e i ncrease that went i n to effec t on January 1. 1992, whereby PBCT's base far e inc rc:-1scd from $0.80 t o $0.90 In addition a year pl'ior PBCT irls t alled GFI C entsABill fareboxes into rnos1 of its llccl. These f
PAGE 181

5. Despite t he significant increase in passenger far e revenue, total local revenue decreased five pe r<:ent from S-6,473,390 in 1991 to $6,148,280 in 1992. Ple.ase explain t his decline in total local revenue. System Response: Pahn Oeaeh County requested all County departments to submit up to 1 5 percent in budget cut s (rom FY 1991 to FY 1992. PBCT incurre d a 9.4 9 percent cut d u r ing thi s time 6. Tite number of transpona tion operating employees increased from 106.2 FTEs in 1991 to 118.4 FTEs i n 1992. Please explain the change i n this empl oyment catcgol)' System Response: Addiliona\ transportation operat ing employees were ne-eded due to the implementation ofPBCT's two new routes (as discussed in the response for qu<:.stion # 2). 7. The number of incidents increased significantly from t wo i n 1991 to 2 1 in 199 2 Given the unpredictab i l ity of these events, arc there any possible reasons for t h i s i n c rease'? System R esponse: POCT could not p rovide. an explanation for the increase i n i ncidents. 156

PAGE 182

4,000 3,000 2.000 1,000 0 PALM BEACH COUNTY TRANSPORTAT I O N AUTHORITY Figu r e III G1 County/Service Area Popu lation (000) 1,000 -800 600 400 +200 -0 1 --19&.4 1'J&S 1H6 1"7 t 1989 1HO "" 19n f i gureiiiG3 Performan c e Indicators Figure III G4 f i gure IIIG2 Passenger Trips (000} ).Ooo[ITII[c:J.=i >.oooL I I I I --,-,,.. 1,000 0 1nc ns ''" .,., 19U ' 191o '"' "n Vehicle M i l es and Revenue Miles Total Operating Expense Figure III GS Passenger Fare Revenues {000) ] -----:V -. -J --' .. ----t---,-vooe. .. ltM iniX'O) --1-f-1 -.--1--1 S6, 000 ----,--.... S4 000 --!--I 1 r .. Ulo .... l?t ') S90<> ::: : : r S300 ,_rf --( lt')lf: I."""' A,.(ho>ool ... -.--1 ----:;=:.t= S600 so -t 1984 19U 1987 19U "" 1990 1 'J't 1 19U ""' ns ,,., ,,., nu "" tt90 , 1tt2 19S.---=bl 40 20 1 I -'-'. O l 1 I -1 t 9 u 1--; I "" '"' "" _,_ I I I9U 1,89 1,11 ,,,1 1 57

PAGE 183

158 PALM BEACH COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY s.o 4.0 3.0 Figure 111-GB Vehicle Miles Per Capita v I 2.0 I ,.._..1 0 0 0 r-,,._. UtS 11&6 1987 1988 11$9 19'90 1991 '"2 10.0 8.0 6.0 4 .0 2.0 0.0 Erfcct ivcness Measures Figure IIIG10 Average Age of Fleet (years) Figure IIIG9 Passenger Trips Per Revenue Mile 1 2 r.... / 0 9 0.6 ,. . 0.3 0.0 1984 198S ltU 1!87 1988 "" IMO 1,1 197: ., ... 1 985 1!t6 1"7 19U ltU 1!90 1H1 1992 Figure IIIG1 1 Figure III-G1 2 Revenue Miles Between Accidents/Incidents Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls 1 ,500,000 J I I I I I ( NOrt t..wrv(lt ....,Ud.04:.,."' 00) . -' =r=---, __ I -1, 200.000 4,000 -..;:: 3.000 2:,000 1--&00,000 ___ ----. -1-I I t--l . 300,000 0 -S-.: NQI(; (""fo.oJHI>\ANI('IIMO)INII.oo ._ ) =r-+ -1,000 0 19&4 t9$S tt$6 ttU ttll ttat tt!I O tttt uu , ttt S ttt6 ttll nn tnt 1990 '

PAGE 184

PALM BEACH COUNTY T RA N SPOR T A T IO N AUTHORI T Y $12.00 S9.00 $6. 00 $3.00 so.oo F i gure III G13 Operating Expense Per Capita g; ;k v -1-,...-. ---' " s 1 ''*7 1 9'!8 ,,., 1990 ,,, 1991 figure IIIG16 Maintenance b:pense Per Revenue Mile so.eo --r so.6o --f--1 -, .... 1 --.F=r-:i $0.20 f--1-=ld DJ-1 -----1 ----"""'ho\N.......O .. "'""'' """ . so .oo l ---f =1,,., ,,n "" 1 ''" un t't10 "'' tHl 1.200 900 600 300 0 Figu r e lii-G19 Re"enue Hours Per Emp loyee --r 1 I I r::: ..... .. -----. -! ., . .. --1---1--,______ _L, 0 ' .... .... 1 --!='!-' : =F''F=I -n nu '"" 1nt ,, .. "" ''' nn Eniciency Measurts Figure IIIG14 Operating Expense Per Passenger T rip S4.00IRITTJ]] :::r . J-rr n S1.00 so.oo ,_ --. Uti IUS 1 9$6 1187 19U 1989 U'O Hl91 1't't2 20\< 15% S% Figure IIIG17 Farebox Recovery Ratio at LJ_ I k;lJ ------1 ---'--. -,...,,( f ".::._ ) 0% ---r --, -r =-f--t -l i ... ''n ,,., ' n u ,,.., uo '''' ''n 20,000 16,000 ll,OOO 8.000 0,000 0 Figure 111-G20 Passenger Trips Per Employee ...-:;;; ..... ......,I -.... .. -.. ---I 1-I I 1 = :;:" -=="'-i i-,: =t=l=f I I UJ IUS 19&6 1t87 19U \9U ,,,0 1 1 1 991 Figure IIIG 1 S Operating Expense Per Revenue M i le S4,00[TTlll l I:J Sl.OO t--1-d-1 j 1 !.-Sl.OO 1 r 1 $1.00 so.oo j j j _] ... 1ll$S \986 1 987 .. uu 1910 ''" ,tl FlgurolllGIB V ehicle M iles Per Pe.:tk Vehi cle 60,000 -:.... .r.-j i"':/' I ----.. ,_I .. _,. 40,000 20,000 --T 0 ___ ,_ __ I ttU t'US tU6 1Ul ., .. liU '"' ''" ltU F igur e IIIG 2 1 Average Far4! so.on --1 f[Jl l ; so.oo/ I I $0.20 --1------r-. -r 1 I -;;;;, ) I r--,-;. ... 11l"S 11U 1"1 "" 19ft 1MO '"' 199 1 I 59

PAGE 185

f>BCT SU MMARY 160 Total passenger IT ips (2, 712,880) and passe .nger miles ( 17,190,1 00) remained constant between 1 99 1 and 1992 due to PBCT's crip sampling waive r for FY 1992 that was iS$ucd by 1hc Fc
PAGE 186

H. TALLAHASSEE TRANSIT SYSTE M PROFILE Oallniution-al Structurt-Tallahassee Transil is a department of C ity government. CO\'t rnine Bodv s.nd Cornposilion -The City Commission s.erves as the Board of Directors ror TALT and has fhe clecred members. Scrvire Area TALT provides se.rvice t o the City of Tallt\hnssee. Modes-T h e sys tem p rovides fix ed-route motorbus strvices And service s to the community hl addition, TALT contracts whh Big J3cnd Tr3nsit for the provi sion of even ing, weekend, and holiday demnnd rcsponse se.rvices. No fixed-rout e servioes are contract e d to private oper:no r s 161

PAGE 187

P ERFORMANC E INDICATOR S 1987 S e rvice Afea Popu la t i o n (000 ) 176.50 Service Area Si t e (SQuare mi'les) nta Passenge1 Trips (000) 2 ,842.30 Passenge r Miles (000) 8,411 .10 Vehie:le MileS {000) 1,486.90 Revenue Miles { 000 ) I ,412. 70 Veh i cle Hours (000) 1 1 2 .70 Reve nue H ours (000) 104. 6 0 Route Miles 209.80 Total Operating Expense (000) $3,154.60 Tot31 Operating Expense (000 of 1984 $) $2, 854.97 Total Maintenan ce E xpe nse (000 ) $753.95 T ota l Maintena nce Expense (000 of 1 984 $) $682.34 To t a l Capija l E xpe nse (000) $ 106.70 T ota l Loca l R eve nue (000) $2, 6 7 6.30 O pera:ting Revenue (000) $1 ,322.65 Pass enger Far e Reve n u es (000) $792. 2 1 T o t a l Em p l oyees 98.50 Tr a n spol1ali0 n Oper ating EmplOyees 66.00 M31ntenance E mployees 2t.50 Administr a t i ve E mployees 11.00 Veh i c les Available for Maximu m Service 44.00 Veh i c les O p e r ated in Maximu m Service 34.00 Spa r e Rali o 29:4 1 % Total Gallons Co n s umed (000} 432.60 --------------------1 62 TABLE III HI Tallahassct Transi t Authority Performance Indicators 1988 1989 182.50 192.$8 n/o n la 3.541.08 3,640.23 9 385. 2 9 9,549.34 1,510.88 1,592. 7 1 1 ,404 .82 1,485.93 115.72 122.94 110.03 1 1 7 .10 209.80 207 .80 $3, 466 1 5 $3,895.18 $3, 024.00 $3,258.98 $803.63 $830.07 $ 7 0 1.12. $694.49 S322 .79 $423.84 $3,234.84 $3,659.40 $1,458.14 $1,549.08 $62 0.06 $801.79 98.50 103.00 66.00 69.50 21.50 n.5o 11.00 1 1 .00 42.00 45.00 36.00 40.00 1 6 .67% 12.50% 434 .36 445.95 1 9 90 192.49 nla 3 ,357.79 10,093.34 1.547 .85 1 ,448.1 6 122. 7 2 1 16. 9 1 197.50 $4.265.60 $3,397.59 $834.10 $664.37 $2,481.70 $4,098.00 $1.510.00 $895.40 103.00 69.50 22.50 1 1 .00 45.00 40.00 12.50% 449.59' 1 991 1992 % 1987-19 2 198.27 129.26 '-26.77% ; n/a 80.22 n/a I 3 453.08. j 3 27.60% 10. 379.95 10,880.66 29.36% 1 ,558.n 1,603 .37 .. 7.8' 3% 1,465 .37 1,509 01 6 .82% ; 1 2 4 .52 -_:; 127 .59 13.21% 118.58 121 .46 16.12% .. 197.50 195.20 -6 .96% $4,767.90 $5,158.70 63.53% : $l,723: 8 1 : .. .. $3,592.80 30,43% $923.20 $1 319.09 74.96% $695.63'
PAGE 188

E FF E C T I V ENESS MEASURES S E RVIC E SUPPLY M il es F!r Capi t a S ERVICE CONSUMPTION PasSenger Trfps P.er Capita Pnsenger Trips Per Revenu e Mile Passenge r P e r Reven u e Hout QUALITY OF SERV I C E Avtlrage SP.eed. (R.M.IR.H.) ". J Aver age Age of F lee t (in yea rs ) N umbor o f Inci dents .. Total Ro
PAGE 189

EFFICIENCY MEASURES 1987 COST EFFICIENCY Ope rating Expe nse Per Capita $17.87 Opera t in g Expense Per Peak Veh icl e (000) $92 .78 Operating Expense Per PaS-sen ger Trip $1.11 Opcrat.it\g Expense Per Pas.s.cnger Mile $0.38 Operating Ex:pense Per Revenue Mile $2.23 Opera tin g Expen se Per Revenue Hour $30. 1 6 Ma in tenance P e r Revenue M il e $0.53 Maintenance Exp Per Operatin g Exp. 23.90% OPERA TING RATIOS Far e box; Recovery 25.1 1 % Local Reven u e Per Operating Expen$e 84.&4% Operatin g Reven ue Per O perating Expense 4 1.93% VEHICLE UTILIZATION Vehicle M ile s Per Peak Vehicle (000) 43.73 Vehide H ours Per Peak Vehicle (000) 3 3 1 R even u e Mil e s Per Veh k:fe Mites 0.95 Revenue M ile s Per T o tal Vehic6e$ (000 ) 32.11 Revenue Hours Per Tola l Veh icles (000) 2 .38 LABOR PRODUCTIVITY Revenue H o u rs Per Employee {000} 1.06 Passenger Trips Per Employee (000) 28.86 ENERGY U TILIZATION Veh'o$! Miles Per Gallon 3 4 4 FARE Average Fare $0.28 164 TABLE JII-H3 T allahassee Transit Authority Efficiency Mc .a.surc:s 1988 1989 $18.99 $20.23 $96.28 $97.38 $0.98 $1.07 $0.37 $0.41 $2.47 $2.62 $31.50 $33. 2 6 $0.57 $0.56 23. 19% 2 1.31% 23.66% 20.58% 93.33% 93.95% 42.07% 39.77% 4 1.97 39.82 3.21 3 .07 0.93 0.93 33.45 33.02 2.62 2.60 1.12 1.14 .. 35.95 35.34 3.48 3.57 $0.23 $0.22 -----------------1990 $22 .1 6 $106.64 $1.27 $0.42 $2.95 $36.49 $0.58 1 9 .55% 20-99% 96.07% 35.40% 38.70 3.07 0 .94 32.18 2.60 1.14 32.60 3.4 4 < $0.27 1991 1 992 % 1987-19 2 $24.05 $39 9 1 123.30% .. $116.29 $125 .82 35. 6 1% $1.38 '$1.42'' : .... 28.15% $0.46 $0.47 26. 4 1 % $3.25 . $3.42 ,53.09% .... .. .. $40.21 $42.47 40.83% .. $0.63 $0.87 63.79% 19 .36% 25.57% 6 .99/c. 19 .87% 1 8.85% 424.93% .. 110.97% 107.64% 26. 8 7 % .. 32.36% 2 2.83% .. 38.01:. . ,. -;;_. 39.11 .58% .. 3.04 3.11 -6.12% 0.94 0.94 -0.9411/o v-> . 3 1.86 31 .44 2 .06% . ' 2 .58. _>l;i- 2.53 6.44% .. 1.07 0.94 .20% ,_, ,, 31.11 28. 16 -2.41% $ 3.49 .. 2.48% < -: $0.27"' A>,;.;-'>. , $0.27 ._._,,. ... -3 .80%

PAGE 190

GENERAL QUESTIONS 1 Were any rare changes made during fiscal year 1992? If so. please provide the previous fare SU\Iclure as well as the updated fare structun and i ndkatc when lhe changes were implemented. No chan&<$ were made. 2 Were 1here any significant changes in area durin& fiscal year 1992? None. 3. Havet here been ruly recent changes or s i g nifi c ant e v ents rhm may help exp lain the pcrformlmcc of the cransi t system? 'The implementation of a .. fare-free" zone for F lorida S ta t e University has s t e .adil y ir l erease
PAGE 191

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTION IS DATA J. As indicated in the tab l e b elow. the number of vehicle hours and revenue hours decreased sign ificantly be tween 1991 and 1992, while the number of ve. h i cle m iles and revenue miles increased. These changes resulted i n an ihcrease in average speed (revenue miles per revenue hour) from 10.77 mph in 1991 to l2.4 2 mph in 1992. I s the r e a n explanation? D i r ectly Operated Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 %Chango VehiCle Miles 1.603 370 2 .9% Revenue M iles 1,465, 370 1, 509,0 1 0 3 0 % Ve h icl o Hou rs 1 .050 1 0 .2 % Revenue Hours 136 ,110 121,460 1 0 .8% System Response: TALT prov ided updated figures for FY 1991 vehi cle ho urs and revenue hours of J 24,5 l6 and 118,583 res p ectively. The revised d ata pro duce an average speed of approximately 12.36 mph for FY 1991, which results i n a change in spee-d from 1991 to 1992 of less than one percent. 2. Total milintcnance expense increased from $923,2 0 0 in 1991 to $1,242, 4 0 0 i n 1992, an increase of appro x i mate l y 34 per cent. Please explain this i n crease Sys tem Respom.e: According to TALT, maintenance expenses increased due t o an aging, O eet and numerous mechan i c vacrulcies t ha t cont ribtJtcd to increased ovc r lime. 3 P lease explain the significant decrease in capital expense from $1.0 49,300 in 1991 to $719,000 in 1992. In FY 1 991. TALT's capital expend i tures included the purchase of several Dia l a Ride vehicles Jt was antic i pated that I I new motorbuses w ould be purchased in F Y 1992. H o w ever it appears that the s e vehicles were not purcha sed. W h at c a p ital purchasr;:s were made in 1992? System Rcsp o r lse: The II new buses w ere bi d i n fY 1 992, but delivery was made in FY 1 993. Cap i tal purchases rnadc in FY 1992 included : r efurbi shment of buses. scat replacement, floor replaceme 1 lt, and electronic destination signs 4 T he total number of employees increased 16 percent between 1991 and 1 992, pr imaril y due to increases in maitltc nance and admin i s t ra tive empl oyee FTE.s ( s ee tab l e on t h e follow ing page). P l e a se e xpla i n the changes i n these-e mployee categor ies. 166

PAGE 192

Olre<:tlyOperated Motor b u s FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change Ooerat.in9 Employees 73. 5 76 .4 4.0% M a intenance E m ployees 26. $ 3 0 17 0% Admi n istrotive Employees '1.0 2 1.4 94 .6% i Total EmplOye-es 111. 0 128.8 16 0 % J ---------------------Syste m Response ; TALT indi c a ted tha t seve r a l dri\'er and mechan i c posi tion s were added: howev er no e xplanation was provided for the incr ease i n admil) i Sir:uive personnel. TALT also i 11dic.at ed tha t the method of S ection 1 5 ca lc u i:Jtion and definition of some job classificat i ons ch\lnged the a lloc ati o n s from the previous year. 5 The number of i nci dents decrease d from 7 1 in 1991 to 30 in 1 992 G iven the unprcdi
PAGE 193

168 2,000 1,600 1.200 800 400 0 TALLAHASSEE TRANSIT f iguro IIIH1 County/Service Area Population (000) 200 160 rJ I ,l...-. 120 ---80 40 0 ----------------------L-19M InS 19U 19t1 19U 19U IHO 1991 1H2 Figure liiH3 Veh icl e M iles and Revenue Miles b l 1.. l ...... lrr r''-+ -. --........ --I J J_J I "1' 1-S6 000 $4, 000 S2.000 so Perfor-mance Indicators 4,000 3,000 2 000 1 ,000 0 Figure III H2 Passenger Trips {000) / --198 4 19*'5 " '"' "" "" 19to 1991 Figure IIIH4 Total Operating Expense ,--;J]J----1 I '"'9'-' '""' o,:..."" r 11'001 \----(OOhl "t-l) r -, $1 ,000 S800 $600 Figure III HS Passenger Fare Revenues (000) -r-:--1.....-$400 ___ --1 S200 so 1984 IMS 19 16 '"' 1H8 1tU 1 m 199 1 1,2 1984 t9ts '"' '"' '"' nu 1990 '"' 1991 ",. ''u "" nt) ,... "" "o '"' un F igure III H6 Totc:.l Emplo yees I LJ:l j --60 3 0 --0 -U&4 "ts 19*6 1987 1!88 1919 1990 1 1 lttl so 40 30 20 10 0 Figure IIIH7 Vehicles in Maximum Servic.e '"""' .L .J --, -I-rr _\'tl>(l(oj ...... .__ f-l A \'ti>(IM()tttoltf -I I I 1n4 1MS 1986 lH) 1ns *'*' li)JO 1,1

PAGE 194

TALLAHASSEE TRANSIT 15.0 12. 0 9.0 6.0 3 .0 0 0 Fi9ure IIIH B Vehide M i lt: s Per capit._ -r---1 --' L t9t 11tS 1 916 1Jt1 IIJU lttt IMO 1 t,l "') ts o 1:2:. 0 9 0 ... ) 0 Errecti\. e -ness Mc:uur Figu r e IU H9 Trips Per Revenue M ile ).j) M ,__ ) I I I '\ 1 0 -. 0 0 1-----------I U 4 IUS 1!16 1911 ttet ,,., 111 0 1991 1 992 Figure IIIH 1 0 Averag11! Age of Flu1 (ynrJ) --..... .,. -,......., 0.0 f.-------i IUt 1-tU UU 191J net l,U lt10 1n1 IHl F igure III H 1 1 Figu r e III H12 Revenue Miles: Between Acdd e r'lts{ln ci dcn1t R evenue Mile s Between Roadcalls 60.000 1---' 1 V-j -40.000 20,000 0 s.ooo 4 000 1 .000 2.000 1.000 -' T t---.'\ I I I . 'IT 0 1,..: '"' ttl-' U f J I M t ltct ltto 1tt1 Itt) ,,..,. IM$ I'IM UJ) ltl& ttl! I,. tttt U9l 169

PAGE 195

170 Figure III H13 Ope r ating Expense Per Capita S40.00 S20.00 J I 1 $ 30.00 -:.J --_ L,_ -_j_ S 10.00 s o o o 19&.4 '''S l 1 U nu ltU "" '"' lUl F igure Uf.H1 6 Maintenance bpense-Ptr Revenue M ile R -jj $0.60 I L I -. u ....., I so>! t_j_I:J_Jl[. so:2. .]..1 ____ L J 1 sooo\_j \ I I 19a.4 1U} I ) U tUl 1,31 19.9 199 9 1991 W H F igur e III H19 Revenue H o urs Per E m ployee ::::r.t 1 I 900 )-:j_"": I I I \ .... J___, 60o 1--1 l 1 I 1--1 I ..J 300 1 t--t-1 1--1--1 __ 1 ,,. ''n .,. '"' tsn ,.,, l'U TALLAHASSE E TRANSIT Erfitltncy Measures F ig ure III H14 Op era ting Expens e Per P a ssen ger Trip $ 1.50 E l l l S 1.20 \ 0 9 0 $0.60 $0.3 0 so.oo -nt IUS 1?l6 19" 19U 19$9 ,tO l191 1 9'9 1 figure III H11 hret>ox Recovery Rat i o .-3 0 % I I I -rr-rTD 20% 1---1 __,_ --r-I 10% -0 % f-..-,,,_. ttU u u 1n1 tt&e 1919 '"o nn Figu r e IIIH 2 0 Passenger Trips Per Employee >.ooo r-.,.--Ll -rnJ 30.000 r----20,000 10,000 !--10 tnt 1 1 U 11U 1987 1na 1189 ttM '''' ltU Figure 111-HlS Operating E xpen se Per Reve nu e M ile $4.0 0 I H i--"" I n o o u .oo -. -. $1.00 I s o .oo -1. 11" lUS 1 ?$6 tnl nat 19$9 U1d 1,1 19n figure IU-Ht8 Vehidt M i le s Puk Ve hide SD,OOO '.. I I I L L
PAGE 196

TALT SUMMARY Total maintenance expense increased 43 pc;rcent from $923,200 in 1991 to $1,319,090 in 1992. TALT cites an ag ing vehicle fleet and numerous mechani c vacanc i e s t ha t co n tributed to increased overtime as reasons for t he increase in maintenance expense. Total capital expense decreased approxima t ely 31 per<:
PAGE 197

I. REG I O NAL T RAN S IT SYS TEM (GAIN ESV I LLE) SYSTE M l'ltOFILE Qrgani7.:&tional S1ructure Regional Transit SY$1ent is a department of the City of Gainesville. Covernine. Body and Compa.silion The City of Gainesville has an elected eommlssion made up or five members. all of whom are responsible for policy decisions regarding ARTS as we.U oaher city departments. In add ition, ARTS has an adv isory board comprised or c itizens from the community which provides i nput to the commission regar ding the transit system and i1S s tnaeture. Scn lcc Area-ART S serves the city of Gainesville an d parts of Alachun County. Mode,,. Fixedrout e motorbus services. ARTS a ls.o prov ides all of Alach ua Counly with demand-response services. 172

PAGE 198

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS County Populotlon.(OOO), i, Servtoo Area Size (squ a re miles) Passengec S :, Passenge r M iles (000) Vehicl e M iles (000) : . Revenue ML!es {000) Vehide Hours (000)'-'
PAGE 199

E FF ECTIVE NESS MEASUR ES S ER VICE SUPP l Y Vehicle Miles Per Capita SERV I CE C O NSUMPTION Passen ger Trips Per Capita Passen g e r Trips P er Reve nue Ml1e P3ssenger Trips Per Reven ue Hour QUALITY OF SERVICE Average Speed (R. M ./R..H. ) Average Age of FJeet (in years) Numbe r o f I ncidents Roa
PAGE 200

E F FICIENCY MEASURES COS T EFFICIENCY O p e r aling E xpe nse Capita Ope r at in g E xpen s e P e r P e a k Veh icle (000 ) Os>etating E xp e n s e Per Pass.en g er Trip Opera t i n g Expense P e r P
PAGE 201

GENERAL I. Wer e any fare changes made during fiscal year 1 992? If so, p lease provide the J)fevious fare s t ructure as well as the updated fare S1r ucture and indicate when the changes were imp lementOO. N o changes were made. 2. Were t h e r e a n y significant c hanges in service/service area during fiscal year 1992? None. 3. Have there been any recent c hanges o r s ig nificant events that may help explain the performance of t he transit system? None. 176

PAGE 202

QUESTIONS AROlJT 1992 SECriON IS DATA NOTE: According to ARTS, responses coul d not be provided for the following que.stions since the Section I S reports submitted for FY 1991 a n d 1992 were prepar<.-d by staff members who are no longer employed with the City of Gainesville. Present management has detemlined t h at there. are maj o r d iscrepancies in the reports tiled and that there is litt le support documentatio n for current staff members to utilize to correct erroneous infonnation o r explain ucnds i n data bctwe<:n the 1991 an d 1992 fisca l yea r s I. P lcnsc explain t h e decrease in capital expense from $535,640 in 1991 to S29,440 in 1992. Whou capital pun:huses were made in 1991?" In 1992'! System Response : No explanatiOil could be prov ide d. 2. Passenger far e re.venue increased 14 percent from .$"749,950 in 199 I to $853,490 in 1992 despite ridership remai ning consti\nt {due to t h e sampling waiver granted by fTA in 1990). Th i s resulted in an increase in average fare per passenger trip from $0. 29 in 1991 t O $0.33 in 1 992. Is there an explanatiOJl for this increase in passenger f.-ue revenue? System Response: No exp l anation coul d be provided. 3 Maintenan ce empl oyees decreased 22 percent from 15.5 FTEs in 1991 to 12. 1 F'fEs in 1992. Please explain the c h ange in thi s empiOyiie System Response: No exp l anation coul d be prO\ided. 4, Total gallo1lS consumed increased from 289,240 gullons in 1991 to 309 ,47 0 gallons i n 1992. Why were more gallons of f uel consumed despite t l slig)lt decline in the amount of service provided between 1991 and 1992 (vehicle miles a n d revenue m iles bo t h decreased apJ>rOximately four percent during this time)? System Response: No cxp lamuio n coul d be p rovided. 5. Tite. numbct of inci dents decreased from 56 in 1991 t o 30 i n 1992. G iven t h e ur1predi CH1bi l i ty of these events, a r e t h e r e any possible reasorts for this d l!di1l e? System Response: No exphmation COtlld be providl!d. 6 11te number of roade<1lls increased from 747 in 1991 to 845 in 1992. To what can this i nc rease be attr i buted? System Response: No exp lanation could be pmvided. 177

PAGE 203

178 REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM (GAINESVILLE) 400 Figure 111-11 County/Service Area Population (000) 200 I I I I I I 160 120 80 0 ttM 1,&6 1tl7 tnt 1$10 1991 1"2 Figure 111 Vehide Miles and Revenue Mi\es $4.000 Sl.OOO $2.000 $1.000 o so Pcrrormancc l ndicalors 3.000 I 2,000 1 ,000 0 Figure 111 Passenger Trips (000) \ / i ,,.. 1tas "" 19U "" ''" tm '"' nn Figure 111-14 Total Operating Expense $1.200 -'f' ..::J.. ..[_::r::.:: ... --$900 $600 $300 so Figure 111-15 Passeng-er fare Revenues (000) -. "' 1/-,. -..;;. -I t?&t au '"" nu ,,., '"' '"o '"' ,,.,. nu '"' n "" ,,., tno ,,, '"' 1,.4 IHS 19K 1911 1!t8 1!$! 1990 tnt lt9l 80 60 20 -0 Figure 111 Total Employees I --f--1' 1 935 "" nn ''" un uto "'' '"' 50 40 30 20 10 0 Figure 11117 Vehicles in Maximum Service J..-... ____ L _, "' r-;;o... .. ,. --,,.. ,,.s ,,., \981 "" ,,., 1971) 1991 1992

PAGE 204

REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM (GAINESVILLE) 10.0 8.0 6 0 4.0 2 0 0 0 Figure 111-18 Vehicle Miles Per Capita I .I 1'1... ./ II' --1 1-1--I 1----....... --Effet"riYencss Measures F igure 111-19 Passenger Trips Per Revenue Mil e 3.0 2.0 1 0 -I 0 0 l--19a4 198 S 1986 11t? 19U ,,.., ltx> '"' 19,;t 19 19-&S 1 986 1931 1988 tnt H90 19,1 19'12 Figure 111-110 Average Age of F leet {years) 12.oji.AIIIJ--. --6.0.1-Ml_., l 3 0 1--i--l-1-1 o.o l--1--1 I I I I tll$4 t U S 1 U 6 t'J t ? UU t9U t9'JO , ,,2 Figure 111 Rev en u e M i los Between Accidents/Incidents 60,000 40,000 20 ,000 0 L ---,,. ua s "" a n "" '"' uto '"' '"z F igure 111112 Revenue Miles Between Roadc alls 2 .000 ---)J 1 r--1,600 i'\ v ..._l T j ']-----------1-------,-1 200 400 0 198-4 1!16 1U1 UU 1989 1"0 1991 199J 179

PAGE 205

ISO REGIONAL TRANS IT SYSTE M (GAINESV I L L E) f i gur e 111 Oper.lting Expense Per Capita S20.00r-r l I I=+J 1 -I U .OO'-+""" +$4.00 1--so.oo '"" ,,,s ''" "' ,, .. ,,., ,,.,o "" nn Figure 111116 Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile $0.50 $0 30 1 r ---1-$0.40 1---1---, --. $0.10 50.20 so.oo 1 IUS 19$6 1 917 1U8 nn IMO I H I 1,92 1,5 0 0 1.2:00 900 600 300 0 Figure 111-119 Revenue Hours Per Emp loyee L j _i. 1?14 1ns \916 1n1 1ne 1"' 1 m 1991 Hm Efficiency Measures F igure 111-114 Operating Expense Per Passenger T r ip 12.00 ... $1.60 1 / i'\. I ,. $1.20 $0.80 / -$0,40 $0,00 IH4 191S 1 916 ltll tUt nn 1 990 ''" 1,.,2 60% 40% 20% 1014 Figure 111117 Farebox Recovery Ratio = I'-!E 1n4 19fS 19$6 19111 ISU 19tt IMO 1991 "U 40 ,000 30,000 20 0 0 0 1 0,000 0 Figure 111-120 Passenge r Trips Per Employee 1/ '\ v 1 \ ""' v i \984 IUS 1,$6 1981 1?l1 1t$J IHO 1 99 1 F igure 111 S Opera ting Expense Per Revenue Mile $3.00 v ....... ..... $2.00 11.00 so.oo n a 1m ' ,,., '"' "" tMO ,,., nn Figure 111-1 18 Veh ide Miles Per Peak Vehicle 50,000 -40,000 .. r 30,000 20.000 10,000 0 " tn IUS 19$6 1!87 19 ,,., IUO 1,1 l"l $0.50 $0 .40 $0. 30 $0.20 1--$0.10 so.oo F igure 111121 Average Fare / !'... r"\ -.... / 1-= tt ,,u ,,., ttU nn ,,., '"o ,,, 1991

PAGE 206

ARTS SUMMARY NO'f6 : The summary comments provided below only idcmi fy significarlt changes i n various performance indietuors from 1991 to 1992. ARTS was unabl e to provide cxphmutions for these c hanges since the FY 1991 and I 992 Sectio n 1 5 reports were prepared by st aff members who are no lo r1ger employe-d with the City of Gaines\'ille There i s little support documentation available for use by current s taff members to validate ARTS's Section 15 d ata o r amdyze the trends for these year s Tota l passenger trips (2,569,580) and passenger m i les (7,660,040) rem;lined constant between 1 990 and 1992 due to ARTS's uip sampling waiver for these years that w:)s issued by t he Federa l T ransi t Admi nistration. T ot a l capita l expense decreased sigrlillcamly from $535,640 in 1991 t o $29,440 in 1992. Passe-nger f; 1 r e r eve 1 tue increased 14 percent from $749 )950 i n 1991 to $853,490 i n 1992. AR TS t h a t no fare c hanges were-made during PV 1 992 Jlte numb er ofmaintcmmce emp l oyee s declined 22 percent from I S S FTEs i n 1991 to 12. 1 FTEs in 1992. n l c OUillber of incidcniS decreased from 56 incidents in 199) tO 30 ii\Ci dems il\ 1 992 a decline of 46 perCe!)l. n1e number' ofr oadcalls increased 1 3 pcrtent from 747 roadcalls in 1991 10 84S r oadcalts in 1992 I 8 I

PAGE 207

J. EAST VO LUSIA TRANSIT AU T HOR I TY S Y STEM PROFILE Qrgani7.alional Structure -Ease Volusia T ransit Authority was established by county ordinance and is, therctore a div'ision of the county. G ovtr njng Body and Comnosi tion VOLT is governed by Lhc Volu.sia County Commissioners who aJI serve as members on the se\'Cn-member Board ofDin:ctors 11le sev en-member Board includes five district member s and two a t l arse members. Scnic.c Art!! VOLT provides public transportation services in eastern Vol usia County. ModesV 0l.1" co ncentrates its efforts Oil prov i ding fixed-route moto rbus s e rvices to the communit y I n additio n VOLT contracts for demand-respon se services. 182

PAGE 208

PERFORMANCE I NDIC A TORS 1987 Service Area Population (000) 330.9 0 . .. Service Area S ize (square mile s ) nlo Passenger (000) 2 095.80 Passenge r Miles (000 ) 7 ,510.00 Vehicle (000) 1,3 48 .00 Reve n u e Miles (000) 1,269.40 .. . Vehicle Hours (000) 106 .20 Rev e nue Hours (0 00) 106.10 Rout e Miles 260,90 Tot a l Opef3ling E x pense (000 ) $2,866.70 Total Operating Expan se {000 o f 1 964 $) $2,594 .42 Total Main tenance Expense (000) $659 ,34 Total M-3intenance Expense (000 of 1984 $} S 596 n Total Capital Expense (000) $ 152 ,50 Total local ReVCJ!UC (000) .. $2,239 .52 Operating Revenue (000) $979 .38 Passen ger F a r e Revenues {000) $718.21 Total Employees 64.70 1f3 nsponai"on Operating Employees 65.70 Ma inten ance Employees 15.00 eMployees 4 00 Vehicles Available for Maximum Service 34.00 Vehides Operated in M aximum Serv ice 26.00 $p;.1r e Ralio 21.43% Total Gallo n s Consumed {000} 363, 40 TABLE 111-J I East Volusia Transit Authority Performance Indicators 1988 1989 346.30 360,05 nia nla 2,149 .42 2)87.32 7,952 ,86 8 275 25 1,496 .81 1,51 0 .33 1,391.48 1,4 03.58 1 07 26 1 06 68 1 03.60 101 5 1 267.20 253.00 $2 ,894. 94 SJ, 104 ,33 $2,525.66 $2,597.30 $665.10 S680.37 $580.26 $569.25 $59. 94 $63 24 $2,352.40 $2,501.39 $1,041 ,03 $1,135 .7l $742.99 $760.4 5 64.70 66.50 64. 7 0 67.50 16.00 16 .90 4.00 4 .10 34.00 37.00 27.00 2 6.00 25.93% 368.81 363.02 1990 1991 1992 19871 9 2 3 7 0.71 3 7 6.70 196.32 -40.67% nla n l o 251.00 nl a 2,943 .95 3.001.65 3,025.30 44.35% 10, 303.84 10,505 79 10,588 .55 40.99% 1 504.59 1,614 .36 1,552 06 15.14% 1 .402.4 1 1,430.44 1,463 .70 15.31 % 1 0 6.46 103.79 1 1 0 14 3 .71% 101.22 99 64 107 .6 6 1.66% 255 6 1 257 00 257.00 .49% $3,77 2 ,19 $3 72 2.8 0 53,782. 78 31.96% $3,004 ,56 $2 605.12 $2 ,730 60 5 .25% $ 1 067 04 $1, 187.34 5 1. 119.79 69.84% $849 9 1 $694.66 $808.32 3M6% $1, 657.40 $1, 491.05 $ 183.53 20.35% $2,6 7 6.40 $2 649 .61 $2 777.34 24.02% $1 2 1 5 .16 $1,130.61 S 1 ,20? .84 23 33% $824.31 $847 26 S642 .81 1 7 .35% 9 0 .50 90 ,50 93 ,50 1 0 .39% 67.5 0 67 .50 69 .30 6 .46% 18.40 18.40 1 8 70 24 .67% 4 .6 0 4.60 5 ,50 37.50% 36.00 37, 00 37. 00 8.82 % 28.00 34, 00 34.00 21.43% 35. 71 % 8 82% 8 .82% n/a 401.30 442.46 436.73 20. 18% 183

PAGE 209

E FFEC TIVEN ESS MEASURES 1987 SERV I CE SUPP L Y Veh icl e M iles Per Capita 4,07 SERVICE CONSUMPT ION Passenger Trips Per Capita 6.33 Passenger Tr i ps Per Revenu e Mile 1.6$ Passenger Trips Per Revenu e Ho u r 1 9 .75 QUALITY OF S E RVIC E Averag e Speed (R.M.IR.H. ) 1 1.96 Average Age o f F leet ( in years) 5 .70 Number of Incidents $2.00 Tot al Roaclcall s 364.00 Revenue Mile s Betw-een Inci dent& (000) 24.4 1 Rovenue M i:e s Between RoadcaiS (000) 3 .4 9 AVAilAB I L ITY R evenue Mires P e r Route M i le ( 000) 4.87 184 TABLE 111-J2 East Volusia Trnnsit Authority Effcctheness Measures 1988 1989 4 .32 4.19 6 .21 7 74 1 $4 1.99 20.75 27.46 13.43 13.83 6 .7 0 7 .67 42.00 49.00 331.00 3 71 .00 33.13 28.64 4 .20 3 .78 5.21 5.55 1990 4 .06 -. 7.94 2 .10 29.09 13.86 7.8 5 28.00 465.00 50.09 .. 3 .02 5.46 1991 1992 %Change 1987-1992 4.29 7.91 94.07% .. ,.,.. -. . 7.97 ,:,. 15.4 1 14 3 3 ,1% 2 10 2 .07 25.19% 30.12 28.0$ 42.00% 14.36 13.57 1 3.43% 6.95 7 .94 39. 30% 55.00 . 2 4.00 : .85% .. 340 .00 267.00 21. 1 5% 60.99 .. 26. 0 1 149.83% : . .. . .... ., .. ' . 4.2 1 5 10 46.24% '< -, ... 5 .57 $ .70 17. 06% -------------------------------

PAGE 210

EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Operatin g Expense Per Capita Operating Ex p etlse Per P e ak Vehlde (000) . Operatin g Ex p e nse Per Passenger Trip Opera !lng Expe nse Per Passe n ger M il o Opera t in g Expen s e Revenue M ile Operati ng Ex pense Per R eV'enue Hour Maintenance Expense Per Revenu e M il e Ma.intenance Exp. Per Operati n g Ex.p. OPE RAT ING RATIOS Farebox Recovery Local Revenue Per Ope r a ting Expense Ope rating Revenu e Per Opera t ing Expense VEHI CL E U TIL I ZATIO N Vehi<:!e M iles Per P eak Vch tc l e (000) Vehicl& Hours Pet Pea k Vehicle {000) Reven u e M ile s Per Vehicle M iles Reven u e M ile s Per To ta l Ve h icles (000} R eve n ue Hours Per Tot3 1 Ve h i c les (000} L.ABOR PRODUCTIVITY Reve nue HoutS Per Employee (000) Passe nger Trips Per E mploye e (000 ) ENERGY UTILIZAT I ON Vehicl e Miles Per G<'ll lon F A RE Ave t a g e Far e 1987 $8.66 $ 102.36 $ 1.37 S0 .38 $2.26 $27.02 $0.52 23.00% 25.05% 78.12% 34.16% .48 .14 3.79 0.94 37.34 3 .12 1.2 5 2 4 7 4 3 7 1 $0.34 TABLE lll-J3 East Volus i a Transic Authority Efficiency Measures 1 988 1989 $6.36 $8.62 $107.22 $1 1 0 .87 $ 1.35 $1. 11 S0.36 S0 .38 $2.08 $2 .21 $27.94 $30.58 S0.48 $ 0.48 22,97% 21.92% 25.67% 25 .14% 8 1 .26% 80.58% 35.96% 36.59% 55.44 53.94 3 .97 3 .81 0.93 0 .93 40. 9 3 37.93 3.05 2 7 4 1 .Z2 1 .15 25.38 31.50 4 .06 3 .94 $0.35 $0 .28 1 990 1991 19 9 2 % Ch<'tnge 19871 992 $ 1 0 16 $9.88 $ 1 9 .27 1 22.42% $134.72 $109.49 $11 1.26 8.67% S1.26 $1.24 $1.25 8 .59% $0.37 $0.35 S0. 36 6.41% $2.69 S2.60 $2.58 14 .44% $37. 2 7 $37.36 S35.o7 2 9 .80% $0.76 $ 0 .83 $0. 77 47.29% 28.29% 31. 89% 29.60% 28. 71% 2t.8S% 22. 76% 22.28% 76.25% 7 1.18% 73.42% 6 .02% 3 2 .:21 % 30. 3 ? % 31 .93% .54% : 53.74 47.48 45.65 5 18% 3 .60 3.05 3 24 -14 .60% ; 0.93 0 .89 0 94 O .t5% 36. 91 36.66 39. 56 5 .96% 2 .66 2 .69 2 92 .56% 1.12 1.10 1 .15 32 .53 33. 17 32.36 30. 76% 3 .75 3 .65 3.55 4 19% $0.28 $0. 28 $0.28 -18.71 % 18$

PAGE 211

GENERAL QUESTIONS 1 Were any fare cha nges made during fiscal year 1992? If so, please provide the previous fare structure as well as the updated fare structure and indica te when the changes were implemented. No changes were made. 2. Were there a ny significant ch;mgcs in scr.,ice/!)crvicc area d\lring fiscal ycnr 1992? None. 3 Have t h ere been any rcccJlt changes o r significant events that may help explain the pcrfom1ancc of the transit system? None. 186

PAGE 212

QUESTIONS AUOUT 1992 SECTION IS DATA I. from 1991 to 1992, the number of vehicle m iles decl i ned whil e the number of revenue m i l es, vehicle hours und revenue h ours increased (see tab l e bel ow), c htmges resulted i1l a decrea s e in average ( r c .venu e m iles per revenue h our) f rom I .36 mph i n 1991 to 13.57 mp h in 1992 Is there a n exp l a nati on? Oi r ect l yOper a t e d Moto r b u s FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change MiSes 1,6 14 ,360 1, 552 060 .. 3.9% R eve nue Mi!es 1, 430,440 1,463.700 2 .3% Ve h icle Hours 103,790 1 10 140 6 t% Revenue Hours 99,640 107, 860 6.2% -----------Systcrn Response: In FY 1991, tota l vehicle miles included t he paratrans i t vehi c l e miles. In fY 1 992, the mistake was caught a n d the pa r am m sit miles were taken out of t h e tota l vehicl e m i l es. (An updnted vehicle mil e figure for fY 199L exclud i ng par : mansir vehicle rnil e s was not p r ovided.) 2. Pkasc expla i n the in c-apilill c;q>cnse from S1,491,050 in 1991 10$183.530 in 1992. What <:npi ta l purchases were m:a de in 1991 ? I n 19921 System Response: Three trolleys were purchnsed, the roof and fnclldc of t h e offices were renov a ted ruld some land for the Transfer Plaza was put chased i n FY 1 991. l11ece were no m a jor cap i t a l in FY 1992 hence, the decline itl cap i ta l expendi tures. 3 1\dministmtive employees i ncreased 20 percent f rom 4 6 FTE:s i n 1991 to 5 5 FTEs in 1992. Ple ase expl ain the i ncrease in chis e-mployee cutegory Sys tem Response: This inct ease occu rred because one equiva l ent f r om t h e Opcr: u ions Oep;lrtmc m wns budgeted under the Admi n i s t rat ion instca..J. 4 The number of incident. s decreased from 55 in 1991 tO 24 in 1992. Giv e n t he unpredi c tabil i ty of these events, arc the r e a n y possi b l e r e asons for thi s decline? Response: According t o VOLT, t his dec l ine is ;mrib u tab l e t o a change i n the definition of i ncidents. Prior t o J anuary I 1 992. incicJems were defin ed as preve n table or non-preventab l e and thresho l ds were not used to different i ate. Now, VOLT uses the $ 1 000 damage threshold a n d/o r whethe r an injury was i nvolved S. Tit e number or road calls decreased f r om 3 4 0 in 1 991 t o 287 i n 1992. ls there an exp l a n ation for t h i s decl ine? System Response: VOLT auribure s the decrease i n roadc.alls to a proac t ive (rather than reactive) mai n tenance program VOLT's preventive r nainte nance program w a s revised so tha t mechanic-al problems were tracked and vehi c les were serv iced at an i demified mil eage before causi ng a roadcall s ituati on 187

PAGE 213

188 2,000 1.600 1,200 800 400 0 EAST VOLUSIA TRANSI T AUTHORITY Figure IIIJ1 County/Service Area Popula t ion (000) 400 300 1 I I \ 200 -1 --. .L ..... 100 0 Utf t,.S 1916 1987 19ta t9H 19to 1991 1H1 Figure 111 Vehide Miles and Revenue Miles $4,000 $3.000 $2,000 $1,000 -so Performance lndicalors figure 111 14 Total Operating Expense L I. ... ,,,. .1 ___ -4 ,000 3,000 2 ,000 1,000 0 -Figure IIIJ2 Passenger Trips (000) / -I_ -tM4 uts '"" 1n1 '"' "" 19to '"' tm $ 1,0 00 $800 $600 $400 $200 so Figure 111-JS Passenger Fare Revenues (000) ----i----'"' t9ts tn6 ,,., ,, .. ''u t m ,,, ,,, 191' IMS 1986 1987 1988 1 989 UiO 1991 1t9l 1914 tMS 1' 1981 19U 1989 tHO lt91 1"1 figure 111 Total Empl oyees 100 rThl I I I I..J I I 80 +--' -60 40 20 1-0 !ua s aa& "" ,,., ''" tno '"' '"z 40 30 20 10 0 Figure III-J7 Vehicles in Maximum Service I I I I .!. i-- ' r- H -r--tnt IMS 1986 1!87 IS$8 1989 1990 IHI l"l

PAGE 214

EAS T VO L USIA TRAN SI T AU THORIT Y 8.0 6.0 4.0 2 0 0.0 flgurtllll8 Vehide M iles Per capita ,__ -'L l lt&4 IUS 1!16 ltU ''" ltJO tttt 1,1 8.0 6.0 4 0 1.0 Effectheness Mea surt5 Figure 1111 0 Average Age of Fleet {years) F igur e 1119 Passenger Trips Per R.evenue M ile :::ffffif I I 1 1 0 c-I I r-_J_ -----o.s o.o ttlt t!U ltl6 1 981 1 98 I!U H l 9 0 WU t9U I ..... v .......v v v : I I 0 0 L ---,, .. un uu ,,., '"' "" ,,.. '"' tttl Figure IIIJ11 R evenue M iles Betwaen Accidents/Incidents Figu r e 111-J12 Revenue Miles Betwe en Roadcalls 8 0,000 60.000 ... -I v : L ----6.000 ;r 7 .. .. 7 v -I-.... 1--4,000 40.000 2,000 20.000 L 0 0 ... ttU tH6 '"" ttU lttt ttM tttt tttl ,,... ,,., "" '"" ,,.. mt t990 '"' ml IS?

PAGE 215

190 Flgu reiiiJ13 Oper a t i ng Expense Per Capita $20 .00 [_ I i I L -, l $16.00 $12.00 I ,.--$8. 0 0 $4.00 so.oo 1M4 198S 1916 19t1 19 U "" 1"0 1991 F igure 111-J16 Maintenance h:pense Per Revenue Mile $ 1.00 $0.80 l + l l at 1 I '-------150.60 ,_] _ .--L. J 50.40 50.20 so.oo 1 IUS 19U 1H7 tUt 1U9 1"0 1991 1 992 F igure IIIJ19 Revenue Hours Per Emp loyee 1 .500rn 1 ,200 -.... -. -900 600 3 00 0 -1-_j I I 1984 IUS IU6 l1t7 19U IU, 1990 1991 199t EAST VOLUSIA TRANSIT AUTHORITY Effic.i cncy Measures Figure IIIJ14 Operating Expense Pe r Passenger Trip 51 50 $1.20 BfH1 ] 50.90 50 60 50.30 $0.00 ,,.. nu u o ''" "" 1-no "" n t z figure IIIJ17 Farebo x Recovery Ratio 40% -[t "=t1 .., 20% 10% I I I I I I I I I 1 --1--1--1 ntt lHS IJ& f 19t1 t1H 19H t"O 1991 1 992 F igure IIIJ20 Passenger Trips Per Employee 4<>.000 Jkl=t=J/ 30.000 20 ,000 I ---110, 000 I I 0 19*' IUS 1'K6 1987 1U8 IH9 1,0 199 1 tSU F i gure Operating Expense Per Revenue M i le $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $0.00 ,,.. nn "" an ''" ''" o '"' "'2 Figure 111 1 1 8 Vehide Miles Per Peak Vehicle 60,000 ....... 40,000 -20.000 0 -1---1--lft4 IUS '"' U87 1 918 UU 1"0 '"' I'U 50 40 S0.30 50.20 S0.10 so.oo f igure 111-J21 Average Fare / ' '" ,,.s ''" ' ''*' ,,., 1no '''' ,,n

PAGE 216

VOLT SUMMARY To t al c "pital expense de<::reased 88 percen t from SJ ,491,050 in I 991 to $183,530 in 1992. This decline o ccurred becaus e VOLT had no major capital purchases in FY 1992. In FY 1 991, VOLT's cnpit a l expend itur es inclu de d three new t roll eys, office renova tio ns, and the purchase of land for a 1 r ansfcr Hlcility. The number ofadministrmive employee-S increased 20 percent from 4.6 FTEs in 1991 to 5.5 FTfls in 1992. The increase resulted from VOLT budgeting one full-time equivalen t from its Operations Depa nmen t under administration in FY 1992. The number or inciden ts decreased 56 p e r cent from 55 incid ents i n I 991 to 24 inc idents in 1992. 11lis decline can be att r ibuted to a change i n VOL Ts definition of incidents The number of roadca1ls decreased 16 percent from 340 in 1991 10 287 i n 1992. VOLT attributed t he decrease (0 a proac t ive (ralhel' than rcm.:live) main1ena11Ce program. 191

PAGE 217

K ESCAMBIA COUNTY TRANSIT SYSTEM SYSTEM PROFILE Organi7..alional StructureEscambia County Tran sit System i s a department of the county government. Gov ernin g Body and Compo si tion ECTS i s governe d by t he Board of County Commissioners, whi c h is comprised of five members who are elected by district in stilggcred two-year l<::rms. Se r vice -The ECTS service area is the urbanized a r ea of Escambia County Modes ECTS p rovides fixed-route motorbus s ervices and contracts to provide demandresponse tran sportation services. 192

PAGE 218

P ERF ORM ANCE I NDICATORS Service Area Poputalio!' (000) Service Area Size (squa r e mi!es ) Passe nger Trips (000) P asse n ger Milos (000 ) Veh icle Miles Miles (000) Vehicle H o urs ( 0 00) Revenue Hours (000} Miles Tota l O p e r at ing Expense (000) OperJting (000 of 1 984 $) Total Maint enaneo Ex p ense ( 000 } fotat Mainten:.mce Expense {000 of 1 984 $) Total Capita l Expense {000 ) Total local Revenue (000) Operating {000 ) Passenger F a r e Revenues (000) Total Empl oyees T r;)nsportation Operating Emp loyees Maint e n a nce Emp l oyees Admi:clistrati,e Employees Ve hicles Avalfab5e for Max im u m SeiVi ca Vehicles Operated in M a x m u m 5ei'Vi ce Spare Ratio Total Gallon & consumed (000) ----1987 278.40 n l a 1 ,076. 3 0 4,990.50 890. 1 0 671.40 59.50 58.40 148 9 0 $ 2 076.40 $1,879.18 $514.95 S465 .04 $454.90 S1,63M2 $1, 0 1 6 16 $739 9 9 54.30 35.10 15.20 4 00 25.00 19.00 TABLE lllKl Es cambia County Tr:tnsit Sys tem Performance Indicators 1 9 88 1989 199 0 282.50 285.4 2 26 2 ,80 nla nla nta I ,049 9 1 1,07 3 .08 1 112 .98 4 ,784.28 5,1841.96 5 ,316.90 920.48 931.83 919.06 9 01.1 0 906 18 900. 31 63. 15 60.95 6 1.42 6 1.97 60.0 8 148. 90 1$0.90 15 0 .90 $2, 159.52 $2,55 9 .76 S2 7 t 8.58 $1,864 05 $2,1 41 .67 S2,165. 3 7 $ 614.17 $805.14 $894.5 0 $535.83 $673.$4 $712.48 $530.37 $574 .28 $390 .69 s 1 ,602 .96 $ 1 ,379 .58 $1,54 1.8 0 $904 37 $575.?5 $ 714.27 $517.99 $ 522.9 0 $651.71 55. 6 0 54.40 5 8 .20 35. 5 0 34.80 36.10 1 6 1 0 15 .60 17.50 4 .00 4 .00 4 .60 2 5 .00 25 .00 25 .00 18.00 18 .00 18.00 3 1 .58% 38.89% 38.8 9 % 38.89% 169.0 0 251.02 250.2 2 251.90 1991 1992 % Change 1987-199 2 265.12 200.00 n t a 42 .00 nta 1,112 .96 1,118.60 3 .93% 5,342.42 7.0 5 % 9 15.20 966 49 8 .81% 898.63 959 .32 1 0 .09% 59 .70 66.65 1 2 35% 58.83 65. 7 1 1 2 .52% 150 .90 237 .70 59.64% $2 ,92 8 .94 $3,298.83 58 8 7 % $2 200 .95 $2,381 .26 2 6 72% $930 .$2 $968 .36 88.05% $701 14 $699.01 49.99% $1 8 7 7 4 $506 .99 1 1 .89% $ 1, 665.95 $1,826 9 8 11. 63% $804 .89 $772.69 -24 09% $661 .79 $606.05 & 10% 56.20 6 1.00 12.34% 35 .00 4 1 .50 16 23% 16. 60 15.50 1.9 7 % 4 .60 4 .00 0 .00% 27.00 27 00 8 .00% 1 8 00 21.00 10 53% 5 0 .00% 28.57% nla 256 .2 5 260 .17 53.95% 193

PAGE 219

194 EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SE R VIC E SUPPLY VehiCle M iles Per Capila SERV I CE CONSUMPTION Passenge-r Trips Per Capita Passenger Trips Per Revenue Mile Passe n ger Tr ips Per Revenue Hou r OUALilY OF SERVICE Average Speed (R MJR H ) Average Age of Fleet (in years} Number of lncidenls Total Roadcalls RcV'cnue Miles Between lncidents (000) Reve nue Miles Between Roadca lls (000) AVAILABILITY Revenue Miles Per Rou te M ile (000) 1987 3 20 3 8 7 1 .24 1 8.43 14 .92 9.20 36. 00 174.00 24 .21 5.01 5 .85 TABLE liiK2 Escambia County Transit System Erfc:c:civcne.ss Measures 1988 3 .2 6 3 .72 U 7 17 .09 14.67 12 .60 69.00 183.00 13. 06 4.92 6 05 1989 3 .2 6 J 3.76 1.18 17.3 2 14.66 13 .60 198.00 31.32 4.59 6 .02 1 990 3 .50 4 .24 1.24 18.5 3 14.99 1t60 13.00 211.00 69.25 4.27 5 .97 1991 1992 II Chango 1987 I ...... .,. 3.45 :. 4.20' 1. 24 18 .92 15.28., 15 .60 4.84 51.<46% 4467%. ...... : ... .... _;;;'\',;,, 1. 17 -5.59% 17.02 64% _,.. t 16.60 n.oo 1 1o.oo ..... ,._,, .. .16% 80.43% -72.22 % ,. ". _., -43.10% 219. 00 I 99. 00 .. 52.86' 95.93 29 6.32% 93.49% 4 .10 9 69 5.96 4.04 -31. 04%

PAGE 220

E F FICIE NCY MEASURES COST EFFI C I ENCY Operating Expense Per Cap'lla Operating Expense Per Peak. Vehicle (000) Operating Expense Pe' r Passenger Trip Oper a t ing Expense Per Pa s senge r M ile Op6 r a t i ng Expense Revenu e Mile . Oper3 t ing Expense Per R even u e Ho u r Main t e n a nce Expen se P e r Reve n u e Mile Maintenance E:xp. Per Oper01ti.ng Exp. O PERAT ING RATIOS Far ebox RecoVery Local Revenue Per Oper
PAGE 221

CENEilAL QUESTIONS I. Wer e <1ny f.:tre thangcs made during fiscal year 1992? If s o ple3Sc provide t h e p r e v ious far e stru c ture as well as the updated fhre stm c ture a n d indicate when t h e chan ges wer e implemented. No changes were m ade. 2 Were rherc any sign ifieam changes in strvicelscrvice during fiscal year J 992? All bus routes wer e mcxlified to facilita t e the new Passenge. r Bus Transfe r F acil i ty and additional service was added usi n g Service Deve l opme n t Funds. 3 Have t he r e bee n any rece.nt c h anges or signi ficant event s t h at may hel p explain the perfo n nan c e of the t r ansit system? Sec response 10 question #'2. 196

PAGE 222

ABOUT 1992 SECTION IS DATA 1. rhe number of veh icle hours and revenue hours both increased a t a great er rah! than d i d either the number of vehicle miles or revenue miles between 1 99 I Md 1992 (sec tabl e be low) This resulted ill a slight decrease in average speed (revenue m i les per revenue h o ur) from 15.28 mph in 1 99 1 to 14.60 mph in 1 992. Is t here an exp l anatio n for these changes? Oi rectly-Operatod Motorbus FY 1991 FY 199 2 "/o Change Veh icle M!Ses 915,200 968.490 5 8% Revenue Miles 898.630 959.320 6 8% Vehicl e Hours 59,700 66,850 1 2.0% Revenue Hours 58,830 65,710 11.7% Sys tem Respo1lse: According to ECTS. schcduk'S were mod ified to add mor e time to all bus routes. The previous route sc h edules were a primary c o ncern or bus operators t h a t was i dentified in a survey co n ducted as part of ECTS's recently-comp l eled Transi1 Developmenl P lan. 2 F rom the data in I he t a ble above, it is apparent t hat 1he amount of service provided has inc reased be l ween 1991 imd 1992. As further evidence the number of dire..:tional route miles and t h e number of vehicles operated in nm:d mtun service have incr eased 58 pcr<::cnt (l50. 9 miles i n 237. 7 rnil e s in 1992) and 17 ( 18 vehicles in 1991; 21 veh icles in 1 992) Pfc;tse eXJ)Inin these changes. System Response: Route mile figures were verified and this infon n :nion is cotrect ECTS specul ates t h a i p r ev i ous yea rs' route m i l e lig ure-s may h ave be. e n incorrec. t. As d is cussed in question #2 of th e "General Ques1i ons" section, t he increas.e i n 1he amount of service provided can be anr i buted to the bus r o ute mod ifications were comp l eted to faciliiOlte t h e new Passen ge r Bus Transfer Faci lity a n d to the additional service that was added using Service Devel opment f:Ounds 3 Total operat i ng expe n se increased from $2, 928,940 in 199 J to $ 3 ,298 830 in 1992, an incr ease of opproxinmtcly 1 3 perc e n t Can this increase be sole l y au r ibute<.l 1 0 t h e i ncrease in serv ice dis cussed J ) revious ly, or are other factor s involved? System Response: 'fhi s cost i ncrease ca n be anributed to the cost of increased service and inc re:lscs i n Workers' Compensation and L i ab ilit>' I n surance costs 4 Please expla i n the in capit;ll expense from $187,740 i n 1991 to $508 990 i n 1992 What caJ )itnl purchases were made i n 1991 ? I n 1 992? Syslcm Res p onse: The increased capi ta l <.:osts can beauributed 10 the purchase of 12 Orion coaches 5 Passenger f!lre revenue dec .reased from S661, 790 i n 1991 to $606 ,050 in 1 992 desp i te a slight incr ease i n passenger trip s dur ing t h i s time ( 1 ,112,980 in 199 1 1 ,118,600 in 1992 ). Th i s resulted in a dccrense i n average fare j)Cr p"sse n gcr trip f rom S0 .59 i n 1991 t o S0.54 i n 1992. Is there an cxpl:matio u r or L h c decline i n passenger fare revenue? 197

PAGE 223

System Re-sponse: Due t o the new route changes, more passe11gers are t ransferring between routes and handicapped ridership (at a reduced fare) has increased. 6 Tota l local revenue increased 10 percent from S 1,665,950 in 1991 to $1,826,980 in 1992 despite the decline in passenger fare revenue mentioned previously. To what can t h e increase in total local revenue be attributed? Response: According to ECTS, more loca l r evenue was budgeted in order to save mor e Federal Transit Administration carryover for FY 1993/1994. 7. Transpomnion operating employee s increased more than 18 perce.nt from 35.0 FTEs in 1991 to 41.5 FTEs in 1992. Please explain the inc rease in this employee category. System Response: The number of operating employees increased due to the Changes in th e routes. 8. llu:: number of incidents decreased from 17 in 199 I to 10 in 1992. Given the unpredictab i lity of t hese events, are there any possible reasons for this decline? System Re. sponse: ECTS instituted an aggressive safety campaign over the past three years and this effort has begun t o pay dividends. 9 The number of roadcalls dec-reased significant l y from 2L9 i n 1991 to 99 in 1992. Is there an explanation for this decline ? 198 System R esponse: The number of roadcalls was reduced due to t he relocation of t he Passe-nget Transfer Facility adjacent to the Administrative/Maintenance Facility. Thi s has allowed for bus swap-outs without the delay of int erruption in service.

PAGE 224

1,000 800 ESCAMBIA COUNTY TRA NSIT SYSTEM Figure III K1 County/Service Area Population (000) 300 200 --1-r-----100 -r---0 nu nu ''" "" "" "" 199 0 ' 1tn Figure III K 3 Vehicle Miles and Revenue Miles 1 -.-:Performance Indicato r s Figure IIIK 4 Total Opera t ing Expense 1,SOO 1.200 "'--900 600 300 -0 r-Figure III K2 Passenger Trips (000) I I I T J --r-....... ..... ---r-----L l'NA IUS ''*' 19tJ ''" '"' 1t10 1991 19U F igure 111-KS Panenger Fare Revenues (000) S8001T-1i\ll-S&OO 6 00 r---r: j'-I _j ------r I O:itM.in t'
PAGE 225

200 s.o 4.0 3 .0 2.0 1.0 o.o ESCAMBIA COUNTY TRANSIT SYSTEM Figure IIIKB Vehide Miles Per Capita ----J -'---Mca,surcs /_ -F igure IIIK9 Passenger Trips P e r Revenue Mile 2.0 1. 6 1.2 -0 .8 0.4 . -o o -M1----IU4 IUS ltl6 19.1 ltlt IN9 1!90 1"1 19U I'J.4 1MS 19l6 ' ltU 19., 1$tl Figure IIIK11 20.0 16,0 12.0 8.0 4.0 0.0 F igure IIIK10 Average Age of Fleet (yea rs) 1----=r-+r:= + I' I, ... ,,.s "" 1 987 .. "" 1990 1991 ts92 figure lll K12 Revenue M i les Between Accidents/Incidents Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls 100,000 10,000 80, 000 If_ 1 / -r\. -8,000 60.000 6 000 40.000 4,000 tx( v..... 20,000 2.000 ------0 0 ,,.. 19t5 1N6 1!87 "*' ,,., ,,0 "" 19'91 1U4 19$ S l9t6 19t1 19 19H IHO 1991 19't2

PAGE 226

Figure 111-Kn Operating Expe nse Per Capita S2o. o o r -$16.00 i--l l-l-l--l--lji7 m.oo I I 1 -1 -!-,.;;; V-. u ll ::::: 1 1=: jI ttu U$S ,,., t'J $7 1988 19U 1n0 ,,, 19n Figu r e III K16 Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile S1.20 .... g 50. 90 1-1-......_ S0.60 1---1 f-r /o -'/ .. --$0.30 [' ... 1---so.oo 1-1 -. --1'$4 IUS \UG 1 981 1SU IJU 19" I 'J'JI '' U Figure IIIK19 Rev enu e Hours Per Emp l o y ee 1.2oo .. -Tr 900"-.. L J I l L 600 l --i I 300 1 1 I 0 ---t i--\Ut I N S U86 1981 19U 19U 1 U 1 t'J .,2 ESCAMBIA COUNTY TRANSIT SYSTEM Erficicncy Me.asures Figure IIIK14 Operating Expense Per Passenger T rip $3.00 liiJJ t' , VI $2.00 $ 1 .00 -r-I $0.00 -IMt t 'J$S t'JU 1 9l1 t 'J$8 t'J U t'J.,O 199 1 199 2 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% F i gure III K11 Farebox Recovery Ratio [---\-11 --' ..,. i'"::p-... --1 ---tU4 In'S \t&G 1U1 19U IU') lUll 1191 1"1 Figure II I K20 Passenger T r ips Per Emp l oyee 25 000 1 -. ._... 1 5,0 00 --. -----..... to.ooo . . --.. s .ooo ----0 ---. ------It&t IUS 19&6 n O 1 98$ 11U 1,0 19'J l 19'12 F i gure III K1 5 Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile S400IIIII, -,...l -, Sloottli-1/Lkt:::i noo 1--1 1 ---l-1 1--r l so.oo+-1 I I I ,.,u ,u, ''*' '"' ,.,.. , 1990 .,, '"l Figure IIIK1 8 Veh icl e Miles Per Peak Vehicle 6o.ooo l I r-11 --L L.... I I. '-.! I 1184 IUS ttU IU1 IU8 IU' 19911 1 99 1 t'J9 1 s o .so S-0. 6 0 $0.40 so.zo figure III K 2 1 Ave r age Fare r -r. __ I ----! --1 SO.OO t ---!-J 1 --i --I uu an ,., t n} '" '"" ,,o .,, 1u1 201

PAGE 227

ECTS SUMMARY 202 The number of vehicle hours increased f rom 59,700 hours in 1991 to 66,850 hours in 1992, an increase of app r oximate l y 12 pe. teent. The number of reven ue hours also increase d 12 pe r
PAGE 228

L. LEE COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY SYSTEM l'ROFILE Organizational Structure Lee Coun ty Transit is a divis ion of t he Lee County Department of Public $rviccs. Covernh1g Body and Composition LCTS is governed by the Lee County Doard of County Commissioners, a five-member pubJic. policy body responsib l e for overseeing all of Lee C ounty government operations. Service An::. LCTS provides public tmnSpOr1\ltion services to Lee County. Modes LCTS operates fixed-route motorbus services and contrac tually provides handicapped transportatioo ser\'ices. 203

PAGE 229

PERFORMANCE INDICA TORS Service Area Poputotlon (OOOf Service Area Site (square mites) Pass-enger Trips (000) Passenge r Miles (000) Vehicle M iles ( 000 } Reve n u e (000) Veh icle Hour s ( 000) Reve n u e H o ur s (000) R o ut e Milts Tolal ()j)e rating Expense (000) To13 1 O p e raling E,cpense (000 o f 1984 $) Tota l M aintena nce Exp e ns e (000) Total Maintenance Expense (00 0 of 1984 $) To t a l Capijal Expense (0 00) l'otal loeat Revenue (00 0 } Opetating Revenue (000) P assengtr Fare Revenu e s (000) Tot a l E mployees Transportation Operating Mainten ance Employees Administra tive Employees Vehicles Available f or Maxm u m Servi:.e Vehicles Operaled in Maximum SeMce Spare Ratio Total Gallons Consu med (000) 20 4 TABLE III-LI L e.c County Transit Authority Dircclly-Opcralcd Motorbus Pcrrormancc Indicators 1 987 1 988 1 989 1990 293.70 307.50 324.52 335.1 1 nla nf> nla nla 693.10 I I 36. 2 4 1,122.58 1,32 0 .06 4 ,368.2 0 4 ,3 6 8.2 4 7,056 2 3 9.964 .57 907 .50 1 051 9 7 1,200.49 1, 268 .58 857.70 993 .53 1,1 26.74 1, 1 8 8 16 58. 20 90 .19 73.8 9 70 .56 . 54. 8 0 87.73 70.5 6 67. 25 458.00 472 .00 472.00 458 .00 $1.912. 2 0 $2,298.90 $2 796 64 $3 1 32.78 $1, 730.58 $ 2, 005.65 5 2,339 .86 52; 495 2 9 5516 2 9 $7 43.93 $568.7 5 $328.65 5467 26 $649.03 $475.86 $ 2 6 1.77 $ 75.3 0 $ 159.71 $ 693.22 $ 2,333.37 51,269 .45 $1,43 8.02 $1, 666 .58 $1, 670 9 5 $372.46 $447 .9& $5 1 3 06 $676 75 535-4.83, $441.8 9 $ 493 94 50. 00 58.00 68.00 61.30 39.00 43 .00 56. 00 . 41.6 0 9.0 0 1 0 .00 11. 00 1 3.70 2.00 5 .00 1 00 6 00 25.00 29 00 33. 00 37. 00 1 99 1 3 44.03 nla ;,';"' 1,352.4 \ 8.890.39 1;457.58 1 ,338.4 4 . 91.77 88. 1 2 368.20 53, 1 27.88 52, 3 5 6 .85 $669.34 $504.34 $25.50 $2 428 .5 8 $728 .3() > $611 .59 64 10 47 90 . 1 0 .50 5 70 36.00 .. .. '' 1 6 .00 22 00 25 00 2 2 .00 24.00 56. 25% 31. 82% 32. 00% 68 18% 50 .00'.4 201.40 2 1 6 4 1 255 1 2 2 9 5.9 1 334.16 1 99 2 % C hange 1987 -199 2 1 3'31.34 12.62% I "" 189.00 n/a . .... .,._ ,,_. ''> 9.182.61 110 21% I '; 1 ,5 0 2.60 \ : < 65.60% I 1,4119.04 65.45% 94 66 6 2. 6 5 % 90 .89 65.8 6 % 368.20 -19 .61% i $3,106 .95 62.48% i .. $2 . 242 .?5 : 29.60 % : $636 .86 23.35% $459.72 ... .61% $ 95 49 26 8 1 % $2,331l. 41 83.S8% $698. 1 2 87.44% ., $567 : 49 5 9 93% 63 60 2 7 20% 49 ,90 < .... "'> 27 95% .,..' ' 11.00 22 22 % . 2.70 35 00% 36.00 44.00% ' 56.25% 44. 00% n /a 322 .?9; ;60. 02%

PAGE 230

P ERF ORMANCE INDI CATORS ServiCe Area Population (000) . . Service Alea Size (SQuare miles) Passen ge r Trips (OQO} ,. ' ; . Passe nger Miles (000) VehiCle Mile S (000 ) Revenue ( 000 ) Vehicle Hours (000) .. 0 R even u e Ho urs ( 000) Ml)es Total Operating Expense (000) .. Total Operatin g (000 of 1984 $) T ot31 Mai n t e n a n c e Expense (000 ) Total M a i n t e na n ce EXpense ( 000 of 1 9 84 $ ) . Total Capital Expense ( 000) Totallc>cal Reven ue (000) Ope rating R evenue ( 000) Passenger Fare Revenues (000 ) Total Employees T ranspot1ation Ope1;1tin g E m p loyee s M aint e nance Employees Ad ministrative Em p loyees Vehicles Availablo for Maximu m Serv ice .. Vehicles O pe r a ted it\ Max imum Serv ice Spare Ratio Total GallOns Consumed (000) .. TABLE lii-L2 J,..ec County T ransit Aut hority P urch ase d Motorbus Performan ce Indi cators 1987 1988 1989 1990 293.70 307.50 324 .52. 335.11 nla nto nla n /a 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 226.82 0.00 0 0 0 o .oo nla 0 00 o o o 0 .00 83.38 0.0 0 0.00 0 .00 8 2 .85 0 00 0 00 0.00 7 17 0 00 0.00 o .oo 7.13 0 00 0 .00 0 00 1 3. 0 0 $0. 00 so.oo so.oo $195.98 $0.00 so.oo $0. 00 $156. 10 $0.00 so.oo $0 00 n / a $0 .00 so.oo $0.00 n /a so.oo $0.00 $0. 00 n/a $ 0 00 $ 0 .0 0 $0.00 n/a so.o o $ 0 00 $0.00 nJa so.oo $0 00 $0.00 nla 0 00 0 00 0 .00 nla 0 0 0 0 00 0 .00 nJa 0.00 0 00 0 .00 nl3 0. 00 0 00 0.00 nla 0.00 0 00 0 .00 4 00 0 00 0 .00 0.00 A DO n la n l a n /a 0 00% 0.00 0 .00. 0 .00 nJa ----1991 1 992 % Ch ange 1 990-1992 344. 03 331.3 4 1 13% nla 189.00 nla 0 00 0 00 nla 0 00 0 00 n/a 0 00 0 .00 n/ a 0 0 0 0 00 nla 0.00 0.00 nla 0 .00 o.oo n/a 0 .00 0 .00 nla $0 .00 so. o o nta $0.00 sa.oo n /a $0 00 $ 0 00 nJa $0 00 $0 00 n/a so. o o $0.00 nla $0 00 $0.00 nJa so.oo $0. 00 nJa $0 00 $ 0 00 nla so.oo $0. 00 nla $0.00 $0.00 nl3 so.oo $ 0 00 nla s o o o $0. 00 nl a 0.00 0 00 nl a 0 .00 0 00 nl a nla nta nJa 0.00 0. 0 0 nJa 205

PAGE 231

PERFORMANCE INDI CATORS Service Area Po-pulatlon (000} Service Are; ,. ':' nfa nla 189.00 1 2 82% nla ''154668 1 ... 1 352 1 ,1 ..... ,,14.5167' .. 1 .09 5 % .. .. > ... .. .... :;; ... nra 8,890.39 9 182 .6 1 110.21% ').. (351.9 6 ,. :;.: 1',457.58 6 5 : 60% -.. ... ..... . ..... .. -, .... ,, .. : '. 1 ,271. 0 1 1.41 9. 04 65.45% .. ... .,: .. v > 77.73 105 .01 . 94 .66 . 62.65% ., .. . ., .... <. ,_.. v .. nla I 7 1 90 I 63.60 I 27.20 % if. nfa -> nla nla 41.0 0 26.00 ... s5.7cr 49.96' 1 "-"' H <> ,,... 10. 50 11.00 22.22% '<: 5.7 0 2.70 35. 00% 36.00 36.00 44.00 % > < ... 50.1 10% I 44.00% I nla <_::'" nfa .I$ '. 334: 16 :-I I 60.02%

PAGE 232

E FFECTlVEIIESS M EASURES SERVIC E SUPPL Y Vehicle Mles P e r Ca pita SERV I C E C ONSUMPTION Pas senger Trips P e ( C apita P asse nger T rips P er R ev e nu e Milo Pas sen g er Tri p$ Per Reve nu e H o u r QUALITY OF S E RVICE Ave,.ge Speed (R.MJ R .H.) Average A g e o f Fle e t (In yellrs) Number of Incidents Total Roadcal l s Re.venu:e MiSes Between Incidents (000) Revenue Miles BetweM (000) AVAI.ABIUTY Revenue Mile s Per Route MIGe (000) -----TA B LE 111-L4 Lee Cou n ly Trans it Auth ority Oirtdly-O(Knlttd Motorbus Efftc: ; livtness M e asures 1187 1 988 1919 1990 3 .09 3.4 2 3 .70 3 .79 2 3 6 3.70 3 4 6 3 9 4 0 81 1,14 1. 0 0 1. 1 1 1 2 6 5 1 2 .95 1 5 9 1 19.63 1 5.65 11. 3 2 1 5 .97 17 .67 7 ,60 6.80 9 .00 4 .S9 16.00 30.00 31 .00 11 .00 737 .00 418.00 304 .00 211 .00 53.61 33.12 33.35 68.01 1.16 2,33 3 71 5.45 1 .87 2,10 2 .39 2.59 1 991 1992 %Chom 1917 2 4 2 4 4 54 46 79% 3.93 4 .38 6 5 .65% 1.01 1.02 28 .69% 15.35 1 5.97 28 .28% 15.1 9 1 5 6 1 0 .25% 5.42 6 .42 1 5.63% 17.00 2 1.00 3 1.25% 168.00 163.00 -77.88% 78.73 67.57 2606% 7 9 7 8 .71 6 411.07% 3.64 3 .65 10580% --------207

PAGE 233

EFFECTIV E N ESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY Veh icle M il es Per Capita S E RV ICE CON S UMPTI O N P asse nger Trips Per Capl!a Passe n ger T rips Por Reve nue M il o P3ss.enger Tr fps. Per Revenue Hour QUALilY O F S E RV I C E Average S p e &d (R.M .IR.H. ) Average Age of Freel (in ye3rs} Numb e r of Incidents Tota l Roa d ca ll s Revenue Miles, Betwee n I ncidents (000) Reven u e M i les Betwee n R oadcall.s (000) AVAILABILITY Revenue Miles Per Route MiSe (000} 208 TABLE 111-LS Lee County TrnnsiC Authority Purchased Motorbus EfftcHvencss Measures 1987 1988 1 989 19 9 0 nla nla nla 0.2S nla nl a nlo 0.68 n l a nl a nlo 2 .7. nla nla nl a 31 .83 nla nta nla 11 .62 nla nla nla nla n la nla nla nla n la n l a nla nla nla nla nla nla n la n l a nta nlo nla nla nla 6.37 1991 1992 o;. C ha';le 1 9 90 19 2 nla ,nla > ,, -. ,_, > nla .' nla *' nta ....... .. nla nla nla nla nla n la n/a .. c; .,<" nta nla nla nla nla nla nl a nla .. -; ' nla nla nl a n/a nla nla nla nl a nla n /a n1o "'" I ---------=------------

PAGE 234

EfFECTIVENESS MEASURES S ERVICE SUPPLY Vehtcle Per CaPit8. SE R VICE CONSUMPTION Trips Per Cap i t a . Passenger Trips, P e r Reve nu e Mire Passe n ger T rips P er Reve n ue Hou r QIJALilY OF SERV I CE Ave rag6 Spoed {R M.IR H.) Average Age of Flee t (in yea rs ) Number of I nc id ents Tota l Rivenue Miles Betwee n (000) Revenu e Mi les Betwee n (000} AVAI LABllJl'Y Reverlue M l5es Per Route M ile (000) TABLE lli-L6 Lee County Transit Authority System Total Effec ti veness Measures 1987 1988 1989 199 0 3 .09 3.42 3.7 0 4 .03 2 .36 3.70 3 .46 4.62 0 8 1 1.14 1.00 1.22 1 2 .65 12.95 15 9 1 2 0 .80 15.65 11.32 15 .97 17 .09 7 .60 6 .80 9 .00 n/a 16 .00 30.00 31.00 n /a 737.00 418.00 304.00 nta $3. 61 33.12 36.35 n/a 1.16 2 .38 3.71 n/a 1.87 2 .10 2 .39 2.70 1991 1992 % 19871 9 2 4 .24 4 .54 4 6 .79% 3.93 4 .38 85.65% 1.01 1.02 26.59% 14. 74 15.97 26 .28% 14.5 8 15.61 -0,25% 5 .42 6 .42 -15.53% 1 7.00 21.00 31.25% 168.00 163.00 -77.88 % 78.73 67. $7 26. 06% 7 .97 8 71 648.07% 3 .64 3 .85 105. 80% 209

PAGE 235

EffiCIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Opartllng Ex::pen.se Per Capita Oporatlng Exp onse Per Pea k Vehicle (000) OporaUn g Expense Per Passenger Trip Operating Expense P e r Passenger Mi)C Opef3tlng Expense Per Revenue Mile Operating Expens.e Per Revenue Hour Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile M;lntonanc:e Exp. P er Operating Exp. OPERA n N G RATIOS Farebox Recovety leal Revenue Pet ()peramg OptrtGng Rew.nu e Per Operating Expense VI!HIClE UTl.IZATION Vehlde M"' Per Vehlde (000) Vttlictt Hours Per Peak Vehicle (000) Revenue Miles Per Vehicle Milas Revenue Miles Per Total Vehicles (000) Revenu e Hours Per Total Vehicles (000) LABOR PROOUCTMTY 1-l ours Per Employee (000) Passenge r Trips Per Emptoyee (000) ENERGY UTILIZATION Vel'llclt Miles Per Gallon FARE AvtrtVI Fate 210 TABLE lli-L7 Lu County Tnnsi t Authority O irectlyOpe.rattd M otorbus Efficir:ncy McaJ:ura 1 91 7 1918 1989 1990 $6 .5 1 $ 7 48 $8.62 $9 .35 $ 1111.51 $ 1 04 .50 $111 87 $142 .40 . $2 .49': . $2.78 $2 02 .. $2 .37 .. $0 44 $0 53 $0.40 $0 .31 $2.23 $2.3 1 $2.48 $2.64 $34.8 9 $26 .20 $39 .63 $46 59 $0 ,60 $0.75 : $0.5 0 $0.28 27. 00% 20. 34% 10 9% 18.56% 19 .22% 17 66% 11.36% 6G.J9% 62.55% 59.59% 53.34% 1U8% 19.49% 18.35'J. 21.60% 58.72 4 7.82 48.ll2 57.66 3 64 4.10 2.96 3.21 0 .95 0.94 0 94 0.94 ". 34 .3 1 34.26 3'. 14 32.11 2 19 3.03 2.14 1 82 1.10 1.5 1 1.04 1.10 1 3 86 19.59 t 6.5 1 21.53 4 .51 4 86 4.71 4 29 $0.51 $0.39 $0. 4 ; 4 $0.41 1991 199 2 % C ha nge t987 $9.09 $9 .3 8'. .. 44 02% .... $130.3 3 $ 12 4 .2 8 3 99% U.31 . "' $2. 1 4 ' ........... : f . ... ,, ..... ... $0 .3 5 $0 34 71% $2.34 $2.19 1.79% $ 35.6 0 $34.18 .0 4% $0,50 $0.45 .. .44% 2 1.40 % 20 50 % .08% 18.27% 57% n.64% 75.01% 12.98% 23 28% 22.47% 15.36% 50. 73 60.11 5 98% .. 3.82 3.79 4 10% 0.92 0.94 -0.0 9 % ... 37,18 39.42 14.89% ... . . 2 4 5 2.52 .. 16,1 8% 1.37 1.43 30.40 % 21.10 22 83 64.66% .. 4.J6 4.66 3.48% $0.45 $0.39 .S.%

PAGE 236

EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST E F F I C I E N CY O perating Per ; O pe ratin g Exp-ense Per Pealt Vehicle (000) E x pon'se .Per Trip .. Operating Expense Per P assenger M ilo Per Revenu e Mile Operatin g E x p e nse Per Revenue Hour EXPense Per Reven u e Mile Mainl en01nce Exp. Per O pt uating Exp. OPERATING RATIOS Faret>ox Rceovery LocaJ R evenv e Per Operating Expense Opcrallng Reve nue Per Operat i n g Expense V E HIC L E UTI LIZAT ION Ve h i cle Miles P er Pea k Vo h lde (000) Ve h i c l e H ou r s Per Peak Vehicle (000) Reve n ue Miles P er Ve h ide Mites Reve n ue Miles Per Tolal VehiCles (0 0 0) Reveo ue HourS Per To l a l Vehicles (000) LABOR PROOUCTMTY .. Revenu e Hour s Per Empl oyco (000 ) Passenger Trips P e r EmplOyee {000) E N E RGY UTILIZATION VehieJe MiJes Pat Gai!Otl FARE Average Far e TABLE 111-L8 Lee Coun t y Transit Aut h ority Purchased Motorbus Efficiency Measures 1987 1988 1989 199 0 n la n/a n la $0.58 nla n/a n la $48 .99 nla nt a n ta $0 .86 nta nla nla nla nla n la nla $2 .37 "" nta nl a S27.5 0 "" nla nta nla n l a nla nl a nla nla nla "" nla n l a nla nla nla nla "'' nla nla nl a n/ a n l a 20.85 nta " nla 1 .79 nla nla n la 0.99 n/a nl a n l a 20 7 1 nt a nJa n / o 1.78 nla nla nl a nla n la nla nl a nla n la nla nla nla nla nla nt a nla 1991 1992 o/. 1 9 90 1 9 2 nta n la nla nt a n la n la nta nla nla n/3 nl a n t o nla nta n la "" nta nla n1a nla nlo n l a nta nl a nlo nla n t a n l a nta nla 1 "" n/a n l a i n l a nJa nl a nla nla nla n l a nla n/a nla nJa nta I nla nla nla nl a n l a nla nt a nta nla n la o 1 a nt a nla nlo 21 I

PAGE 237

I EFFI C IENCY M EASURES COST EFFICIENCY Oper..ting Epen.s.e Per Capita Operating Expense Per Peak Vehicle {000) OperOJting Expens e Per Passenger T t p Operating Expense Per P assen g e r M il e Operating E xpense Per Reven u e Mi !e Operating E.1tpense Per Revenue Hour E x pens.e Per R eve n u e M ile Mai nten a nce Exp Per Opera l ing Ex.p OPERATING RATIOS Farebox: Rec o very l oca l Reve nue P e r Ope r ating Expense Opefa l i ng Rt._.en ue Per Ope-raling Expanse VEHIClE UTi liZA TION Vehicle M iles Per Pea k Veh i cle (000) Vehic l e Pe r Puk Vel'llcle (000) Reve n ue Miles Per V e h i c l e Mites Reve nue P&r Tot-al Ve h icle s (000 } Reve n ue Hours Per Tota l Vehides (000} lABOR PRO DUCTIVlTY Revenue Hours Per Empbyee (000) Passenger T r ips Per Employee (000} E NERGY UTiliZATION Ve h k5e Miles Per Gal l on fARE Average F='a1e 212 TABLE IJI-L9 Lee County Transit Authority System Total Efficiency Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 $6.51 $7.48 $8.62 $119. 5 1 $104.50 $111.87 $128.03 -. $2.76 $2.02 $2.49 $2. 15 $0.44 $0.53 $0.40 n/a $2.23 $2.31 S2.4s $2.62 $34.89 $26 .20 $39.63 $44,76 $0.60 $0.75 so. so n/a 27.00% 32.36% 20.34% n / a .. 18.56% 19 22% 17 66% nla > 66.39/o 62.55% 59.59% n / a 19.48% 19.49% > 18.35% nl a 56.72 47 .82 48. 0 2 52.00 3.64 4 1 0 2 .96 2 .99 0 .95 0.94 0.94 0.94 .. 34. 3 1 34.26 34.14 31.00 2.19 3 .03 2 1 4 1. 8 1 :.-1.10 1.5 1 1.04 n /a < 13.86 19 .59 16. 5 1 nla 4 51 4 .86 4 .71 nia .. .. . $0.51 $0.39' < $0.44 ... n / a 1 991 1992 1987-19 2 $ 9 .09 $9.38 44,02% .. $130.33 $ 124.28 3 .99% .. ''.''. ' ., . 1 $2 3 1 "-' _,__ ;, 2.42% "'' $2. 14 _,' ' $0.35 $0.34 n/a $ 2. 3 4 _,. -,., ' -"'' :> $2.1 9 -i.79% ... $34.08 $34.18 -2.04% $0.50 .,_. .. '"' $0,45 25. 44% -21 40% 20. SO% 24.08% '>-. 18 :27%: 1.57%. '"' . ., 77.&4% 75.01% 12. 98% ....... ' > .... 23.28% 15. 36% 60,73 60.1 1 5 98% 4.38 3 79 4 10% 0 .92 ;, ,.,_ o :94 .09% .... -" .Jo> - . 37. 18 39A2 141.89% ' . -' 2 .55 ,,. .c-1; .-. : t; 1 :43 30: 4 0% 1 1.28 .. . < .. 18 81 2 2 .83 64. 66% ' i 4.36 . ,:; 4 .66 3 48% (:- .. ,. t v ').-' SO.AS ..... -... >>:)'t---. $0.39 ' .64%

PAGE 238

GENERAL QUESTIONS l. Were nny fi\rc changes made d u ring fiscal ye. ar 1992? If so please provide t he previous fare structure as well as the updiued far e s t ruc tur e and indic a t e when the c ha nges wete implemented. T h e system w ide fare structure did n o t cha nge However) there was a change in the trolley serv i ce which made this service a free zone effective April 1 1992, six month s into the fiscal year. 2 Were t h ere any s i g n ificant changes in service/servic-e area during fiscal year 1992? None. 3 Have there been any recent changes or sign ificant events that may help expl a i n t h e performance of t h e tran s i t S)stem? Lee County Tr ansit oper ates as a func t ion of t h e Lee County government. During f'Y 1992, the Transit D i v i s ion was being merged wit h t he Tolls D i vision i n order to conso liditle itdminismnive staffs withi n the Department of Transporta tio n of Lee County Ti l is a ls o accounts for the decline o f FTEs in t h e adminis[l'ative crnpl oycc c ategory sj nc..: th..: s tarr (<:du c t ions wcte made to the Tmnsit Division. With th e conclusion of F Y 1992 i t was then dete rmined by t h e L.ee County govern m ent nd111inistration to real ign lhese divisio n s The Transit D ivision removed comp l ete l y frotn the of Trnnsportnti on nnd made of the Ocp:ulllh!'tlt of P u blic Services ;nul once ag:ti n opera ted as a single d i vision within the new department. 1lle previousJy.rcduced transit administrative positions were reg ained and filled for FY 1993. TI1i s has proven to be a positive mo ve for t r ansit serv i ce and continues to move forward. 2 1 3

PAGE 239

QUESTI ONS AROUT 1992 SECTION 15 DATA I. ToCt111ing expense dea
PAGE 240

Sys tem Response: In reviewing t he data provided i n t he t able, the number of opernting employees for FY 1991 appears to be incorrectl y St3ted at 55.7 FTEs. The published Section IS report submined indicates this number to be d7 9 FTJ.Zs. w h ich would r esult in a 4.2 percent increase from 1991 to 1992 in this particu lar employee-category. Additionally, the adminis tr ati\'e sta ff d i d experience employee re .duction dur ing t h e 199 2 fiscal year. Two positions were vacant the e ntire year and a thir d was vacant for pan of the year. 215

PAGE 241

216 LEE COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY Figure IIIL 1 county/Service Area Population (000) :: [ I F-IJ_:iJ 2oo-j-l l l f I 1 -11 00 I I I I I I I I I 0 -1--n tc 19U 1 6 1917 ,, .. 19&9 IHO 1991 1H1 F igure llll3 Veh icl e Miles and Revenue Milos 1, 600 ; TI I I ---2 1200 .._._ L J L $4 ,00 0 , -$3,000 BOD r ----(T l --l "., '"'' ..... --_ l Molti\Wro Sl,OOO $2,000 400 0 so Pe r formance Indicators Figure llll4 BOD F igure llll2 Passenger Trips (000) 400 t ttJ I I I I IJ 19&-& 19U ,_. ' nu '"' ttto ,,, t99l Total Operating E xpense Figure III L S P as s enger Fare R evenues {000 ) r--.,. --rn--rr 1 --. J ------, _,V .. O!'-tl _..,, _\'0 .. 1 1 .... u 1'-r1-I I $800 r ,. ..... S600 S4DD Nl)lt ..... :2--= = $200 so 1984 I U S UK Ut? 1Ut 1 M $ , tttl 19M 198S 19*6 1 987 19U tt 1990 1991 1"1 """ nt$ a u ,,., ,,.. ''" nto "" nu BD 60 40 20 0 Figure III L6 Tota l Emp loyees r -.., -[ l ( ... :.w :c;.) ' 19$<1 U.S 1946 t n 1 19U 19., t ttO 11t 1 19!11 Figur e 111-l? Vehicles i n Maximum Service so t-r-r-I __ 20 ,. 10-_l_ -I""'""""'' 1-1 I -1 I vmt .... (}rto.,, o--1--:...1= I 1-1-. ,.4 1ns "" 1987 uu "" '"o '"' nn

PAGE 242

LEE COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY figure IIIL8 Vehicle M iles Per Cap ita s.o ,--.--.r-...--r-.-T"'-.--. ::ttlJiHl 2.0 1--1 -1--1 -1--1--1 1 -! 1.o l-l I 1 --0.0 1-1-+--1 -.. 1--1 .. I 1984 ttn ltll 1U1 "" ltlt WJO "" I!IU rtedi\eness M easurfS figure IIR9 Puungtr T rips Per Revenue M ile 1 2 .., o a 0.] 0 0 ,,_. -------lta.t InS ltU ,., nn ltU 1"0 1UI 199! Figure 111-L 10 Average Ag e of fleet (yea rs) I I 1 \ -..... / -,. --lOOlf l..,... ......,.. .... _.. ) =t--;-t=l I 1-m ::U-1 4.05 2 0 ( 0 0 ,,.. 1 tas ' uu ttal ,,., ttto '"' '"' Figure IIH 11 Figure lll l12 Rovenue Miles Between Acddents/lnddcnts Rev enue Miles Between Roadca lls 80,000 2:0,000 ---1/ -"" -1 7 --I r\ ... :f: ( ..o.f ....... .;_2-10,000 60,000 8.000 -----,..c fOOII IdWn .. ._..,.,,.. ) "'----.-== ...--. --4 -1 rD+f 6,000 40,000 .ooo 2 ,000 0 0 1'JU ttl$ ttl6 I H l .... .,., 'fto 1,1 t9t2 U M IM:S l"' 1tt1 ltu U*' lftl lftl 217

PAGE 243

218 Figure IIJ.L13 Opera ting Expense Per C ap i ta S10.00 r S8.00 1_L I hliFt1 $6.00 I S4.ool-i I I I I I I I s2.oo I I I I 1-l-+so.oo L 1 I I 1-,_. '"s ''" ,,.., "u "" ttto '"' tttt Figure 111-L 16 Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile so.so $0.60 ____ u "1(11( loo:-..Jtl -j -" tu t==1--t --i S0.40 S0 20 $0. 00 1 IUS 19*6 1U1 19ll 19" 1HO 1991 1992 1 ,600 1.200 BOO oo 0 Figure 111-L19 Revenue Hours Per Employee rl 1 11\1 1 1 I '......,/ --i --1-. (_;'-...... .., -"'" ,...., ) 19$4 l!JS 19U 19'7 1 m 19U 1 990 Uti 1992 LEE COU NTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY Erficicnc:y Measures Figure III L 14 Operating Expen.se Per Passenger T r i p $3.00 0 / $2.00 j_ $1.00 so.oo tU4 tns "" 1HJ uu ,,., 1tto '''' tttl Figure IIIL17 Farebox Recovery Ratio 25*.4 . I I I 15% 10% -5% .. ( -lfOIE E o<\rltt _) 0\\ ''" nts ,,.. tnr "" ''*' ato "" 1991 25,000 20 ,000 I 15,000 10,000 5 000 0 Figure lll l20 Passenger Trips Per Emp l oyee / j"o.. / Vc "''I);(; ..... ) ttU tnS '"' "'' "" an t99o "" tm Figure IIIL 15 Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile $3.00 $2.00 ....... r-v i -----------------$1 .00 so.oo ,, ,,.$ ,., 19t1 ,,.. ,.,, '"0 ' 19tl FlgureiiiL18 Vehicle Miles Per Peak Vehicle 84.000 60,000 ....... v 40. 000 20,000 ;-'-0 1H4 191'S lt86 1t87 19N 19$11 1tt0 199 1 1,1 SO.EiO $0.40 $0 .10 $0.00 j-" --Figure llf.L21 Average Fare I ---------J --( WlE ) -__ 1 tnt tus 1986 t 981 198t 1tn "'o ' '"l

PAGE 244

LCTS SUMMARY To tal capital expe n se increased significant ly rrom $2S.SOO in 1 99 1 to $95,490 in 1992. ntis inc.rease is primarily a ndbutablc to LCTS's purchase uf a new main t enance nccl computer !iys tem
PAGE 245

M. SARASOTA COUNTY AREA TRANSIT SYSTF-M PROFILf. St rurlure-S arasota County Tra n s p orta tion Authority functi onally operates as the Transit Department of Sarasota County government. The tr a n sit system is inf onnally known as the Sarasota County Area Transit bus sy stem and uses the acronym .. SCAT" for marketing purposes. C
PAGE 246

PERFORMANCE INDI CATORS 1987 Service Alea Popu.l a tiOtl (000} . 251.30 Servi ce /Vea S iz e ($qu are m il es ) n;a Pa$Scnge c T tips (000) . 788.80 Passen ger M Ues (000) 3, 182.80 VChi8 Milos {000) .. .. . 875 50 Rev e nue Miles (000 ) 76 8 .50 V e hic l e Hou r s (000) 60.99 Rev & nuc Houts {000) 58.70 Rou t e Miles 251.40 Tolal Op(lrat i ng ElCpcns e ( 000) $1,839.20 T otal O p eatting E.lcpen.ie {000 of 1 984 $) 5 1 ,664. 5 1 Total Maintenance Expense (000 } $259.70 T otal M a i n t eMne (000 of 1984 $) $235.04 T o ta l Ca,pltal E)(pen se (000) $44.30 Total Loc-al R evenu e { 000) $1, 1 46 .06 Operatin g Revenve (000) S41 3.42 P assenger Fare Revenuos (000) 5397.66 Tota l Empl oyees 50. 5 0 Tran s pottt.l.tion Operat i ng Emplo y ees 3 4.90 Main t e n a nce Employees 9 .70 Adm nistratiYe 5 .90 V e h ic les Ava il able for Maximum SeMce 3 3.00 V e h icles Operated i n Maxi m u m Servic e 15.00 Spate Ra t io 120.00% Total Gallon$ Consumed (000} 169.70 TAilLElli-Ml Sarasota Coun t y Area Trans-it Pcrrormance Indicators 1988 1989 257. 70 283.94 n ; a 827.32 90G.48 3 124.85 3,694. 77 888.05 1.047 .08 8 1 0 .3 6 964.61 64.00 71 .01 6 0 1 8 66.55 253. 2 0 288.50 $ 1 9 2 7.20 $ 2 .242. 7 6 $1,681.36 $ 1 876.45 $29M 1 $34 0 .54 $255.63 $284.92 $48..44 $ 1 9 .59 $ 1, 187.04 $ 1,346. 5 3 $423.03 5461 .41 $ 4 12.88 $4-42. 88 51.00 57. 7 0 35.50 41.30 9 .50 1 0 .00 6 .60 6.40 33.00 3 5 .00 1 6 .00 1 9 .00 106. 25% 171 7 1 204.99 1990 199 t 1992 %Chan ge 1987 277 78 283.14 247.28 .60% n ; a n;a 96. 20 I 1 ,052.41 ' 1,189.38 1 ,258.56 S 9 .SS% 4 188. 61 4,763. 9 1 5 ,102.69 60.32% I 1 .090.8 1 1 ,090.35 1 109.99 26.78% 1,024.4 0 1 ,024 9 3 1 ,044 .50 32.4 7 % 7 4 .02 74 6 7 75.29 23.44% 69.79 70.30 71.06 2 1.06% 28630 268.30 293.8 0 16.87% $2, 5 1 8 .00 $2,570.19 $2,74 3 .3 3 49.16% $ 2 ,006.06 $1,936.63 $ 1,980. 28 1 8 9 7 % $379 6 1 $433.-42 $419.63 51.58% $302.36 $326.58 $302.91 28.88% $11.24 $2,229. 4 3 $30. 9 2 30.20% $ 1 5 8 5 .53 $1,854.38 67.83% $51 5 .50 $580.05 $603.81 4 6 05% $499.00 $522. 2 3 $522.83 60.30 00. 1 0 60.10 19. 01 % 4 2.50 41.80 42.10 20.63% 11.'10 1 1.60 1 1 .20 6.40 6 .7 0 6 .80 37.00 46.00 3 7.00 1 2 12% 19.00 1 9 .00 20.00 33.3 3 % 142 .11% 85.00% .,. 2 19.68 258.75 275 9 7 62.62% 221

PAGE 247

EFF E CTIVENESS M EASURES 1987 SERVlCE S UPPL Y Vehic l e Milts Pet Capita 3 .4a SERVlCE CONSUMPTION Pf!ssenger Trips Per 3.14 Passengtr Trips Per Revenue Mile 1.00 Pass e nge r T rips Per Revenue Hoor 1 3.44 O U A UTY OF S ERVlCE Aerage Speed (R. M./R.H.) 13.43 Average Age of Ae e t yea r s) 8.40 Numbe r of IOO:ldcnt s 25.00 Tot31 Roadca\1$ 559.00 Revenue Mites Betw een lnclde nts (000) 31.54 Reven u e M i l es Betwee n Roadealls (000) 1 .41 AVAILABIU!Y Reve nue Miles Per Reule Mil e (000) 3.14 222 TABLElllMZ County Area Transit Effec t iveness Measures 198 8 1989 3-45 3.97 3.21 3.42 1990 3 .93 3.79 ... 1.02 0.94 1.03 1 3 75 13.5 8 1 5 .03 13.47 1 4.50 14.68 9 40 10 .68 13.'16 42.00 43.00 2 1 .00 5 1 7.00 727.00 859.00 . 19.29 22.43 4 8 ,78 1.57 1.33 1.19 3.20 3.34 3.55 .. ' 1 991 1992 % Cha9J e 1987 f 2 ' 3-85 .. .. -;,4.49 2 8 .84% v 4 .20 ''--"5.09 :;;. (:--62.15% < "'-"' i' ,. ... : ., ,,._.,_, .. .. 1. 1 6 1.20 20.45% .. ... . . '. 16.92 ;l' 17 .71 1 4.58 ; < ..... 9.42% 10.70 12.30 46.43% 28.00 ,; 9.00 -64.00% .. ... 6 16.00 472.00 1 5.56% .. .. ,_.. ... 36.60 i:' 1 16.06" 267.96% " ' 1 .66 2.21 56.88% .. 3.58 3.58 : 13.35%

PAGE 248

EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFACIENCY Ope f ating Expense Pe t Opetati n g Expense Per Peak Veh i cle ( 000) OperaJing Per Passenge r Trip Operating Expense Pe r Passenge r M ile . . Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile Ope rating Expense Pe r Reven u e Hour Maintenance P o{ ftevenue Mile Exp. Per Opetat!ng Eltp. OPERATING RATIOS F a r ebox Recovery Local P.&ven u e Per Operat i ng Expenso Opo r ating Revenue Pet Opeuulng Exp e nse VEHI CLE UTILIZATION Vehicle M i les Per Peak Vehicl e (000) Vehic l e Hours Per Pe3k Vehicle { 000) Revenue Miles Pe( Vehicl e Miles Revenue Mi l es Per Tota l Ve h icl es {000) Revenue Hours P er Tot al Vehlcl es (000) LA60R PRODU CTIVITY Reven u e Hou r s Per Employo6> {000) PMsen.ger Trips Per E mployee (OOOJ ENERGY UTIUZATION Vohi<:I O M i lO$ Por Gallon FARE Aver age Fare 1987 $7.32 $122.61 $2.33 $0.58 $2.33 $31.33 $0.33 1-1.12% 21.6:2% 62. 3 1 % 22.48" 58.3 7 4 .07 0 .90 23.89 1.7$ 1 .16 15 .62 5.16 $0.50 TABLETII-MJ Sarasota County Area Transit Efficiency Measures 1989 $7. 48 $$.50 $ 120.45 $116.04 $2.33 $2.48 $0.62 $0. 6 1 $2.38 $ 2 .33 $32.02 $33.70 50.36 $0.35 15.20% 15. 18% 21.42% 1 9 .75% 6 t S9% 60.04% 20.57% 55.50 55.11 4.00 3 .74 0 91 0.92 24.56 27.56 1.82 1 .90 1 17 1 .15 16.03 15.66 5 17 5.1 f $0.50 $0.49 1990 1991 1992 %Chango 19871992 $9.07 $9. 0 8 $11.09 5 1 .58% $ 132.58 $135. 27 $ 1 37. 1 7 1 1 87% $2.39 $2.16 $2.18 -6 5 1 % $0.60 $0.54 $0.54 -6 .95% $2.46 $2. 5 1 $2.63 12 .00% $36.09 $35.56 $38.60 23 .21% $0.37 $0.42 $0.4() 21.98% 1 5.07% 1 6 .86% 1 5 .30%. 8 3 3% 1 9.81% 20. 32% 19.06% 86"4 62.95% 72. 1 5%-70. 11% 1 2.51% 20.47% 22 .57% 22.01% .08% 57 .qt 57.39 55.50 -4 9 1 % 3.90 3 .93 3 76 7.4 2 % 0.94 0 .94 0 .94 -1A6% 27.69 22. 28 2$.23 18. 15% 1.89 1 .53 1 .92 7.98% 1. 1 6 1.17 1.18 1 73% 17.45 19.79 20.9< 34.07% 4.97 4 .21 4 .02 .04% ${).47 $0.44 $0.42 17.60% 223

PAGE 249

GENERAl QUESTIONS t Were any fare c.hanges made d uring fiscal year 1 992? If so, p l ease provide t he prev ious fare s t ructure as \\'ell as the updated fare s truc t ure a n d ind icate w hen the changes were implemented. N o chang es were made. 2. Wer e t here any s ign i ficant c h anges in se r vice/serv i c e a rea during fiscal year 1992? A Satur day and Sunday beach shutt l e was initiated in Mar c h 1992. 3 Have t h e r e been any recent <::hanges o r sig nificant ev e nt s that may he lp exp l ain t h e pe rforma nce ofhe transit system? N one. 224

PAGE 250

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTION 15 DATA I Passenger miles increased a t a greate r rate than did passenger trips f rom I 991 to 1992. This resulted in an I I percent increase i n average t r i p length as indi cated in the table below. Is there an fol' these changes? I Directly-Operate d Motorb u s FY 1991 FY 1992 OJo Change I Passenger Trip-s 1,189,360 1 258.560 $ .8% I Passenger Mile$ 4.763 .910 5 .604. 220 17.6% I Avor age Trip L ength 4.01 mi!es 4.45 mites 11. 2% System Response: SCAT provided an updated figure for FY 1 992 passenger miles of 5,0 1 2,694. The change in this perfomtancc indicator results in a n updated average trit> length ofat>proximatcly 3 98 miles for FY 1992, a value thnt is less than one percent shorter t ha n theaverage tri p length i n FY 1991. 2. Capital exp ense decreased signifieanlly from $2,229 430 in 1991 10 $30,920 in 1992, a decline of approximately 99 percent SCAT purchased 1 3 new liftequipf1ed buses in F Y 1991 in addi t ion to miscellaneous ec)uipmcnt. Whnt purchases were made in 1992? System Response : I n FY 1992, c .apita l purchases made by SCAT included radios, s hop e quipment, and reb u ilt engines. 3. 1 lte number of vehicles availab le for maximum service decreased from 46 vehicles in 1991 co 37 vchidcs in I 992, a 20 percent decline. In addition, the average age of the v ehicle fleet inc reased I S percent from 1 0 7 years in 1991 to 12.3 years in 1992. Please explain the ch1mgcs that have o ccurred in the vehicle inventory. System Response: With the arrival of the thirteen 1 99 1 Orion buses, SCAT p laced 15 of their 1982 Skillcraf t buses on inactive staws awaiting dispositl. SCA'f, however, st ill has 15 buses 1970) ict service. Tilis has resulted in a stmisticall y older ncct. 4 The number of incidents decreased significantly from 28 i n 1991 t o nine in 1992. Given the unpredictability of these events) are a n y possible reasons for this decline? Syslcm Response: N o specific reasons for this improvement i n safe t y could be identified; howev e r SCAT a.uicipates thm the decrease in i ncident occurren ce can be anributed to the system's safely progmm. S. The numbet of roadcalls decreased from 618 in 1991 to 472 in 1992. Is there au exp l anation fo r th is decline? System Response: This is a dircet resuh of upgrading the qua lity of the fleet. Tile thirteen Orion buses were placed into service in January 1991. allowed SCAT to p lace most of t heir 1982 Skillc raft b us<.'S on inacti\'c stntus, thus reducing roadcalls since SCAT had experienced a number of problems with t hese vehicles 225

PAGE 251

226 SARASOTA COUNTY AREA TRANSIT Figure IIIM1 County/Service Area Population (000} 3oorr::r-]--,I-,--J-] I I 1 N -. 200 100 I 1-l--1--_, 0 tn4 1HS 1H6 t9U ,,,, t'JU 191'0 '"' 19!11 F igure III M3 M ile s and Revenue Miles 1 ,200 !-... _.l 9001 J ... I I L I I J ...,'-'--. -----I ' I n --600 -l'crfo rmanc:c lndicnton F igure IIIM4 Total Operating Expense .... $1.000 IT 300 -i o L--1 1 . I .. . _, _ j ___ -so 1,500 1 200 900 600 300 -0 -----figure IIIM2 Pass&nger Tr ips (000) r!/ v ---e--1 ---------------------__ I t'Jlt t'JU aa 1JU tnt an "" 1991 '"Z $600 $400 $200 so Figure IIIMS Passe nger Fare Revenues {000) .. ---L .. , 1 9 $ S 198' 1'M1 19U t'J U 19'JO 1 H 1 t"l t'M4 uts ''u a n un ,,., 1tt0 ' nn 1914 1t8S 1986 t9t7 1t8l "" 1"0 1 991 Figure III M6 Total Employees son I I I l L n 60 t-+----t-1--t-:; I I I 1 ....... 20 =i -r--r--, __ LL_,__ . 1:.-: . 40 0 1U4 19tS tt$6 19.1 t9U Ul9 1,0 1t91 1992 so 40 30 20 10 0 Figure IIIM7 Vehic les in Maximum Serv i ce j "' -v --,.. .. r -------. - -----" I 1"4 "85 1!186 1911 U88 19tt 1990 1t91 t9U

PAGE 252

S ARA SOTA CO UN TY A R EA T RA N SI T 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 t.O 0.0 Figure 111-MB Vehicle Miles Per Capita ;;;;:-!--/-. I ----i ----nat 1 9$ S tno t'U ttn t 'l$9 t'J'J O t M t t'l?l 15.0 Effecciv t ness Measures F igure IIIM9 Passen ge r Trips P er Revenue Mile :::t I l I 1 L 0 9 0.6 0 3 0 0 -''*4 196s ,,., ''*' ,,.., ,., III M10 Average Ag e of Flee t (years) l -_ L _____ [ '"s "" tn7 '"' "" 1 HO U'it Figure 111 M 1 1 Revenue Miles Betwee n A c cidents/Incidents 1 20,000 90,000 r ------.... -----) --I --__1 __ [ _1_ = 60,000 30,000 oJ .. 1 984 IUS '"' 19U n n 1 989 U10 1"1 1992 Figure III M12 Revenue Mi l es Between Roadcalls l.soo-.-.-,-.--r-,1--.-2,000 t.soo 1 984 1 985 1936 1 987 t'JU t9U tUO a?t 227

PAGE 253

228 f i gu r e III M 1 3 Opero.tin g Expense Per Capita $t2.00IITTITTU 5600i n T 1 1 r-' s3.oo 1 H--1 I + --l I I so.oo1 -1--1--1--1 ---1 19ft t9U t9U t n J UU 1tlt 19 90 ' 1ttt Figure lli M 1 6 M a inten.ln
PAGE 254

SCAT SUMMARY Capital expense decreased sig nificantly from $2,229,430 in 1991 t o $30,920 in 1992. In FY 1991, SCAT purchased 13 new lift-equipped buses as well as other mis cellaneous equipment. The d e clin e occurred because SCAT's capital expenditures in fY 1992 only included radios, shop e q uipment, and rebuilt engines. TI1c number of vehicles availabl e for maximum serv i ce d ec reased from 46 in 1991 to 37 in i992, a decrease of20 percent. According to SCAT, the decrease in flee1 sizeresulted when 15 of the system's 1982 Skillcraft buses were plncc:d o n inactive status awaiting d isposal once the 13 new 1991 Orion buses were delivered. 1'l1e number of inci dents decreased approx imately 68 per cent from 28 incidents i n 1991 to nine i nc i dents in 1992. While no specific r<:ason( s) for this decline could be ide ntified. SCAT believes t h at the dec rease may h:we n:suhed from the system's snfcty program. The number of roadcalls declined 24 percem from 618 roadcalls in 1991 to 472 roadcalls in 1992. SCAT indicated l hat this deercasc is a d irect r cs u h of upgr ading the quality of the vehicle ncet. 229

PAGE 255

N. L AKELAND AREA MASS TRANSIT DISTRICT SYSTE M P R OF IL E Oruan ip!lio nal S tru r ture .. Lakeland Area M as s Tra.nsit DistriCI is an i n dep e ndent a ut h o r ity {special taxing Govun j nc Oody a nd ComnosUion -t.AMT is governed by fivc m ember Board or Director s comprised o r thr ee Cily C ounc .il members and LWO Count y Com m issi o ners. Service Arcn .. LAMT serves the Lakeland urbanized arco. Modes Scrvice.s provided by LAMT include fixed-route motorbus s ervice s and demandresponse services. 230

PAGE 256

PERFORM ANCE INDICATORS S e rvice Area Populat!on Service AJea Sizo (square m iles) Passen ge r Trips (000) PaMengcr M i le-s (000 ) Vehit> MilO$. (000) Reve n u e (I?'JO) Vehi d e Hours (000) Reve n u e Hour s (IX)O) Routo M iles Tota l Ex p !nse (000 ) . T o t al Operatin g ExPimsc (000 o t 1984 $ } Tot al Expense (000) T ota l Expci\SO (OOl o t 1984 $) ()ap itru Expense (000) Total Local Revenv e (000 ) Opera ting Reve nue (000) Passenger F aro ReVenues (000) T otal Employees Tr a n sportat ion Operating Employees Main tena nce Employe es Adml.nlsua tiv e Empl oyees Vehicles Available for Max i m u m Serv i ce Vehicles Oper ated i n Max imum Serv i ce Sp:110 Fbti O T o ta l Gallons Consumed (000) ------------TADLEIIINl Lakeland Area Mass T r ansit District Perrormancc Indicators 1987 1 9 88 1989 1990 3 89. 1 0 400. 40 <10.86 405.38 I I I I 406.60 452.08 5 1 2 .68 703.89 2 222 .90 2,435.4 2 2 ,691 5 4 3 31 5 8 1 558.80 662.79 744 63 847.29 554 .00 659.90 741A7 842. 53 33.90 39. 9 7 44.49 49.23 33.80 3 9.72 44 .11 48.79 1 22.40 126.00 126.00 152.00 $70< .30 $881.97 $ 1 ,349.00 $t,404.22 $637 .4 1 $769.46 $ 1,128.66 $1 118.48 $150.02 $192.66 $238.04 $ 167.25 S135.n $168.08 $199.16 $ 1 33.21 $502. $2.08 $292.55 $2,266 .78 $870.27 $925.97 $ 1 ,250.22 $1.495 .54 $375.63 $421.05 $371. 67 $620.11 $178.5 2 $201 5 2 $255. 2 4 $31 0 84 26.10 27.10 31.00 32.70 20.70 21.30 23.80 26.20 4 .00 4.00 5.40 5 30 1.40 1.80 1.80 1 20 t4. C O 14.00 1 4 .00 19.00 12.00 13.00 1 3 .00 1 5 .00 16 .67'l. 7 .69% 7.69% 26.67% 113.8 0 13$.94 152.97 181.81 ------1991 1992 %Change 1987 414.70 1 1 0 .00 .73% I 90.00 I 782.46 860.84 111.'12% 3.685.48 3,977.85 78.95% 886.92 896.59 60.45% 880.58 883.99 59 .58% 52 5 4 54.50 60.77% 51.82 51.88 53.49% 152.00 152.00 24. 1 8% $ 1 ,373 57 $ 1 ,464.56 107 .94% $ 1 ,03 4.98 $ 1 ,05 7 1 9 65.86% $220. 1 7 5328.50 1 1 8 .98% $165.90 $2'37. 1 3 74.86% $974.0 7 $46.06 90.S3% $1,542.63 $1,640.48 86.50% 5661.54 $721.1 9 91.99 % $298 .68 $421.3 7 136.04% 33.90 35.70 36 .78% 27.40 28.SO 39.13% 5.30 5 50 3 7.50% 1 20 1 40 0 .00% 19.00 19.00 35. 7 1 % 1 5.00 14.00 1 6 .67% 26.67% 35.71% I 194.07 217.03 90. 71% --23 I

PAGE 257

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVlCE SUPPLY Veh.icle Mile'S Per Cap ita SERVICE CONSUMPTION Passenge t T tip$ Por Capita P3:itcnger Trips Per Revenue Mile Passe nger Trips Per R evenue Hour QUAl iTY OF S ERVICE Avetge Speeo {R.M./R.H.) A\'erage Age o l Aeet yaar5} Numbor of l ooid cnts lot3 1 Roadcalls Revenu e M i le s Betwee n tncidenls (000) Revenue Milt$ Between Roadc.alls (000} AVAILABI LITY Revenue M i les P e r Route Mil e (000) 232 TADLEI!l-N2 Lakeland Are a Mass Transi t Distric t Effectiveness 1\-fcasurcs 1987 1988 1989 1 990 1 .44 1.66 1.81 2.09 1.04 1. 1 3 1.2 5 1.74 0.73 M9 0 .69 0 .84 1 2.03 11.38 1 1 .62 1 4 43 1 6.39 16.61 16.81 17 .27 3 1 0 5 .10 6 14 5.40 23.00 36.00 26.00 29.00 30.00 50.00 70.00 148.00 24.09 1 8 .33 28.52 29.05 18.47 13. 20 10.59 5 .69 4 .53 5 2 4 5.88 5.54 1991 1992 % 198719 2 2.14 8.15 467. 5 5 ... 1.89 648.90 ... 0.89 0.97 32. 68% 15 : 10 ' -9 . 16.59 37. 93% 16.99 17.04 3.96% 5 .95 6.95 1 2 4 19% 15 .00 26.00 13 04% 152.00 306 .00 920. 00% 58.71-: 34.00 41.1 5 % 5.79 2.69 -&1.36% 5.711 '-5.82 28. 4 9%

PAGE 258

EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Operalin g Expense Per Capita Ope r ating Expense Per P eak Vehi.c(e (000 ) oponll ing Expense Per Passenge r Ttlp Operal ing Ex.pen$e Pe r Paswnge r Mile Operaling Expense P e r Revenue Mil e Operat ing Expens e Per Revenue Hou r Maintenance Exp ense Per Reven u e Mile Maintenance Exp. Per OpoHHing &p. OPERATING RATIOS Farebox. R e covery loca l Reve n ue P e r Oper ating S,Cpense Operatlog Reve-nue Per Operating Expense VEHICLE UTI UZATION Vchl0 Miles Per Peak Ve hicle {lXX)) Vehicle Hours Pet Peak Vehi cle {COO) Revon u o M i les Pet Veh i d e Reve nue Mil es Per To tal Veh ic l es { 000) Revenu-e H o urs P e l T ota l Veh i cles (000} LABOR PRODUCTI VII'Y Reve n u e Hours Per Empl oyee (000) Passenger Tr ips Per Employee (000) ENERGY UTILIZATION Veh icle Mi l os P o r Ganoo FARE Aver age Fare TA8LElll -N3 Lakeland Area Mass Transit District Efficiency Measures 1987 1998 1989 1990 $1.81 $2.20 $3.28 $3. & $58.69 $67.84 $ 103.77 $93.61 $ 1.?3 $1.95 $2.63 $1.99 $0. 3 2 $0.35 50.50 $0.42 $1 .27 $1.34 $1.02 $1.67 $20.84 $22.20 $30.58 $28.78 $0. 27 $0.29 5M2 $0.20 21.30% 21.84% 17.65%. 11.91 % 25.35% 18.92% 22. 14% 123. 5 7% 1 04 .99% 92.68% 106.50% 53-33 % 47.74% 27.55% 44 16% 46.57 50.98 57.2 8 56.49 2 .83 3.07 3 .42 3 2 8 0 .9 9 1.00 1 .00 0.99 3 9 .57 47.14 52.98 44 .34 2 4 \ 2.84 3.15 2 .57 1.30 1,4 7 \ .42 1 .49 15 .56 1 6.68 1 6 .54 2 1 .53 4 91 4 .84 4.87 . 66 $0 ... $0.4 5 $0.50 so. 1991 1992 % 1987-19 2 $3.31 $ 1 3 .31 &35.56% $91.57 $104. 61 $1. 76 $1.70 .78" $0.37 $0. 3 7 16.20% $1.58 $1.66 30.32% $26.51 $20 .23 35.47% $0.25 $0.37 37.23% 1 6.09% 5 31% 21.74% 28.77% 1 3 .51'% 1 1 2 .31% .35 % 49 .62% 59.1 3 64.04 31.53% 3 .50 3,89 37.80% 0 .99 0 .99 .0.55% 46. 3 5 .46.53 \7.57% 2.73 2 .73 1 3.10% 1 .53 1.45 23.00 24 .1 1 54.78 % 4 .57 4 .13 1 5 .87% $0.30 $0.49 11.49% 2 33

PAGE 259

GENEI!AL QUESTIONS I. Were any fare changes made dur ing fiscal year 1992? If so, please provide the previous fare structure as well as t he updated fare stn1cture and indicate when t h e changes wer e imp lemente-d. No c hanges were made. 2 Were there any significant changes in scrvice/scr\'ice area during fisca l year 1992? None. 3 Hav e 1here been any recen t changes or significant events that may he l p explain the perfonnance of the transit system? LAMT has b een undertak ing rnore inte n sive promotional efforts during the L 992 liscal year .. 234

PAGE 260

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTI ON IS DATA 1 The number of passenger tr ips and passenger miles inc.re.ased at rates great er than t h e increase in the amount of revenu e -service provided between 1991 and 1992 ( sec tab l e below) To wha t can 1 his i ncrease in r i dership be attributed? OirectlyOpe rated Motorbus FY 199 1 FY 1992 %Change Passenger Trips 782,460 860.840 1 0 0% Passen ger Mi les 3 685 ,460 3 977,650 7.9% Reven u e M ile s 880,580 883, 990 0.4% Reven ue Hours 5 1,620 51,660 0 .1% System Response: LArvtT altr ibutes the increase in ride1 sh i p to th e intensive promotiona l efforts that havebeen undertaken durin g FY 1992 and 1 0 an increase in I he number of local organ izations pur<:has jng passes for their clients. 2 Mai 1llcnancc cxj)(:nsc increased more tha.n 49 percent l fom $220, 170 i n 1991 to $328 _,500 in 1992. Please exp l ain t his increase. System Response. : According to LAMT, t he increase in maintenance expen s e is the resuh of the highe r costs associatcU with trying to k eep older buses o n t he road. 3 Please expJajn the decline in capital expense from $974,070 in 1991 to $46,060 i n 1992. W h a t c-aJ>ital purchases were made in 1991 ? I n 1992'? System Re.sponse: I n FY 1991, capita l expenditures included the construction of LAMT's downtown bus ttrlll i n al. No maj ot capital p urchases wen! m ade d uring the 1992 fiscal year. 4. Passenger fnre revenue increased 4l percent from $298,680 in 1991 to $421.310 i n 1992 despite only a J O percent int re-ase i n ridership during t his time (sec rable a bove). This resulted in nverage per passenger trip i n c!'easing from $0.38 i n 1991 t o $0.49 in 1992. T h e s i g nif'icam increase-in passeo gcr f a r e r evenue mny be due t o the inclusion o f dcm(lnd rt:sponse far e revenue dma w ith that for directi)'Operated mototbus If this is t he case, can a b reakdown of 1992 passenger fare revenue b e provided by mode? O r if the 1992 fare revenue lig ure is only for the directly-operated m o t o rbus mode. is t h ere a n expl a n a tion tbr 1he s ignificant increase? System Response: LAMT provic.lcc.l an updlltcd figure of $360,400 for its FY 1991 fitr c revenue however it was determined that this new figul'c contitc the rct.uive stability i n the amount o f sci'\ ice p ro\idcd (sec 1abl e above) Please explain t h i s i ncrease i n fuel c onsumption 235

PAGE 261

System Response: No exp l anation for this intrease toul d be i dentified. 6. T he ave-rage age of the vehicle fleet increased from S.9S years i n 1991 to 8 .17 years in 1992 due to t h e addition of four City Bird buses (manufactured i n 1978) to t he active vehicle fleet (Section 15 Repon Fonn 408, MB400). Including these four vehicles, LA Mrs active fleet now consists of23 total however. only 19 vehicles arc r eported as being available for maximum serv i ce Please explain System Response: According to LAMT, the four 1978 City Bird buses did not run and, as such were not available for service Therefore these buses were actually considered eme-rgency cont ing ency vehicles and were not pan of t he active vehicle fleet. As a result, the ave r age age of lhe vehic l e fleet for FY 1992 was updated to 6.95 years. 7. The number of incid e nt s increased from 15 in 1991 tO 26 i n 1992. Given the unpredict ability of t hese events, are there any possible reasons for t h i s increase? System Response: No expl anation f or this increa se c o u l d be identified. 8. The numbe r of roadcalls more than doubled from 152 in 1991 to 306 in 1992. Js there an exp l anation for this significant increase? System Response: l..AMT attribute s this increase in roadc:alls t o the declin ing reliability of the system's older vehicles. 236

PAGE 262

LAKELAND AREA MASS TRANSIT DIS TRI C T Figure III N1 County/Servi ce Area Pop ulation (000) S O D 400 ---300 -----I -200 100 0 '"" tUS ,,86 au t'J&a '"' 19'Jt t'J91 F igure III N 3 Pcrfo rm:mcc Jndicators figure IIIN4 Figure IIIN2 P assenger Trips (000) 1,000 ,.=: __.J.,./. I 800 600 I-+_ -L .. .., 400 2oo 0 ''*" \!IU "*' ''87 ttaa uu ,,to '"' nn Vehicle Mile s and Revenue Miles 1.000 Tota l Operati ng Expense ::::::r I J -"[ r c_ -T f igure III N S Passenger Fare Revenues {000) SSOO---r--r.-.I 800 600 400 200 0 ... H-S900 1-1 +--+ # ' ...---.,..,. ssool;:; 1 ,,....o,...,...,.-_..,t()O) $300 -1-Mt -, ---v --r-------. .. .. I Y-r S400 ; S300 $200 -SO I ' t'J&S t m 19 81 ,,.. "" ,,., "'' 19$4 t!l8 S t n-4 ,,u 1U8 t'JU t'Jto t?tt t'J$ tUS ,,., 190 ''*' ,., 1"0 1"1 ,:12 40 30 2o 10 0 F i gure IIIN6 Total Employees ---1------------i --------1-----1 1984 IUS "" 19U t'JU ,,., ''" 19'J1 1991 20 16 Figu re 111N7 Vehicles in Maximum service If II I I I .... _ .,. I 12 ---j 8 --1 .. :....;1 j 4 -[ 1---,----r o 1-f-1-, ... 1'*5 t 'JtO UU 1U8 19t'J 19,0 1991 tJ 237

PAGE 263

238 LAKELAND AREA MASS TRANSIT DISTRICT 10.0 8.0 -6.0 4.0 Figure IIIN8 Veh i cle Miles Per Capita ----i-2 0 I I I J__ o.o I!U u n "" '"7 ''" "'o "" ''n F.rfcctivcncss Measures Figure III N10 Average Age o f Fleet {years) Figure IIIN9 Passenger T rips Per Revenue Milo 1.0 0 8 0 6 0.4 0 2 0.0 ,,.s '"' '")' "" ,., 1990 '"' '"l 8.0 19'kLJ 6.0 4.0 ...... 2 0 0 0 ,_[ __ --1-. 1ft' t9U UU Uf1 ''" nn ,,0 '"' 19U Figure IIIN 11 Revenue M ile s Between Accidents/Incidents Figure IIIN12 Revenue M i les Between Roadcalls 60,000 40,000 J-1SJ \ / i'. / 20.000 20,000 8,000 \ --V-1\ 16,000 12.000 4 ,00 0 0 f--. -0 Uf' 19tS ltli 1981 t9 U t9U tHO 1991 1"1 U&t 1915 1H6 U U tnt tnt 1!90 1"1 1!'12

PAGE 264

LAKELAND AREA MASS TRANSIT DISTRICT $15.00 $12.00 figure IIIN13 Opera t ing Expense Per Capita -! ----1 S9.00 1. $6.00 -$3.0 0 -. rJ -1----1 -1--t$0.00 Figure III N16 Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile $0.40 S0. 30 $0 .20 S0. 1 0 . . --i ---, I SO.OO I ---1--+---1-1 1-1 .. i-"" 198$ 19$6 ,,., ,,.. "" ,,0 "" 19'91 Figure IIIN19 Revenue Hours Per Employee 1.600r.IJ..WZ:1 I l 1 200 1 l l soo I I 1----1--l-1-1-!-i 400 .L. ..... r-. J _ J 1 -___ I!IM 198 5 191G 1nl 1 9$$ t9&1 IMG 1991 1,2 Efficiency Measures Figure lii N14 Operating Expense Per Passenger T rip Sl.OO $2.00 ...... / 1\ S1.00 -so.oo -1---1 --IU4 IUS 1186 IUJ 1'J88 1989 U10 1M1 I 'J'J2 Figure IIIN11 Farebox Recovery Ratio --l--!A 10% 1 1--1--1-----0% -1 18-1 1 9$5 ,,, ,,u ,, .. 1189 1991) 1991 1912 15.000 20.000 1 5,000 10,00 0 s.ooo 0 Figur e IIIN2 0 Passenger Tri ps Per Employee -=m l*'i ------1--i E __ l ____ ---1---1 I ------1 1 9J4 19$S ttU 1ft? UU 1181 19!10 19!11 I'Y.ll Figure III N15 Operating Expense Per ftevenue M ile ____ l I so.so ttj-"--1 --1--1so.oo 1--1-1--1 1 --1-J_. I t184 19U 1!186 IU1 1U8 19U U'JI I 'J'Jl Figur e III N18 Vehlda Miles Per Vehidc ::: : r 40.000 ---F r -___ -1-_ ..... }o L ___ ____ J I UU 19U 1986 1981 t'Ja& 11U 19 1991 1':112 F igure IIIN21 Average Fare SOSOIT'I I T ;.; --,-------so.40,-l_l l -l . S0.30[' --1 i -S0. 20 -- i SD10L____ ----r-r-__ so.oo1-. ------,-+ L U34 198\ 1986 1987 t'J88 1939 19 1991 1"2 239

PAGE 265

LAMT SUMMARY 240 Passenger t rips increased 1 0 percent from 782,460 i n 1991 to 860,840 in 1992. According t o LAMT t h i s increase resulled from t he sys tem's intensive promotiona l efforts underta k e n d uring FY 1992 and from an increa se in the number of l ocal organizations purchasing passes for thei r clients T ota l maintenance expe ns e increased f rom S220, 1 70 i n 199 1 to $328,500 in 1992, an i n cr e a se of more than 49 percent. LAMT a ttribu ted tl1is inc r ease to the higher maintenance costs associated with the old e r buses in the fleet. T otal cap ital expense dec.reased mor e th a n 9 5 perce n t from $974,070 in 1991 to $46,060 i n 1 992. 1l1e C-On struction of LAMT's downtown bus t cn ni nal was included in capital expenditures for FY 1991; howeve r LAMT d i d n o t repon any major capital purchases i n FY 1992. Passenger fare revenue i n creased 41 percent from $298, 680 in 1991 t o $421,370 in 1992 (des p i t e only a 10 IM:rcent increase i n passenger trips). It is antic ipated that t his increase is due t o demandresponse fare revenue dollar s being included i n t h e passenger fare total reported for FY 1992 The number of i ncid ents inc reased f rom I 5 incidents in 1991 to 26 incid ents in 1992. However, no explanation coul d be identified for t his i ncrease. Htc number of r oadcalls increased significantly from 1 5 2 in 1991 to 306 in 1992. LAMT bclic.vc:s tha t lhis increase can be attributed to the d e cre asing r e l iabi lity of older vchklcs in the system.

PAGE 266

0. MANATEE COUNTY TRANSIT SYSTEM PROFILE Orgaulzational Srructurt-Manatee County Transit is a division within the Otpartmcnt of Community Services of Manmec County. Governing Body ::tnd Composition -Manatee County Transit is go ... cmcd by the Board of Coun t y Commissioners. Service Arc:. -111e system provides serv ice to the urbanized parts of Ma n a l ee County Modes MANC operates fixedroute motorbus ser. ices as wcH as d e m and-response tra nsponation services. 24 I

PAGE 267

PERFO RMANCE INDICATORS SCf\Oic.c Area Pop ulation (000) Service Area Size (square mile$) P3ssenger Trips (000) Passenger Miles. (000) Veh i c l e Miles (000) Revenue Miles (000) Veh icle Ho urs (000 ) Reve n ue Hours (000) Route Mf.es Total Operatiog EXpense ( 000) Total Ope rating Expens-e ( 000 of 1984 $) Tota l Mainten a nce Expense (000) Tot31 Maintenance Expense (000 of 1964 $) To t a t Ca pital Expe nse (000) Tota l Loc.al Revenue ( 000) O p e rating Revenue (000) Pas.senger Far e Revenues (000} Tot31 Employees Trans portation Oper ating Empl oyees Mainten a nce Empk>yees Empl oyees Vehicles Availabl e for Maxm u m Servtce Vch idc s Operated in Maximum Service Spare Ratio Total Gallons Con s utned (000) 242 TABLE lllOI Manatee CounCy Motorbus Performance Indicators 1987 1988 1989 1990 1 8 1.7 0 187.5 0 19 2 .69 211.71 nla nla nl a n/a 571 .30 566.38 559.85 5 2 7.27 2,774 .60 2 279.98 2.437 .38 2.217 14 588.1 0 576.33 525 .29 493.65 532 .50 557.2 8 507.62 476.8 6 36.00 35. 1 7 32.41 32.46 34.50 33.68 31 .28 31 .32 167 .20 142.40 123.70 12 3.70 $1, 160 .70 $1 ,333.34 S1, 3 19 .98 $1,325.02 $1,050.46 $1,163 .26 $ 1,104 .38 $ 1 ,055.39 $213.57 $310 .64 $368.98 $288.64 $193.28 $271. 01 $308. 71 $229.90 $282.30 $ 615.33 $1,189 .79 $215.29 $1,106 7 9 $ 1 ,04 2 11 $ 1,168 .09 $ 1,230.00. $269.4 9 $268. 8 5 $295.82 $300.06 $226.49 $225.36 $ 239.33 $251.84 32 .30 28.52 26:46 24.40 29.90 25.30 22.35 20.30 0 .00 0.00 1.50 1.50 2.40 3 .22 2.61 . 2 .60: 15.0 0 1 3 .00 1 4.00 15.00 11.0 0 9 .00 8.00 8 .00 36.36% 44,44% 75 00% 87.50% 134.00 123.25 1 10.05 101.43 -----------1991 1992 % 1987-19 2 215.13 215'.00 nla 747.00 n / a 636.72 643.17 12 58% 2,535.44 2 ,624.13 -5.4 2 % 530.74 . 566. 11 . -3.74% 514.57 f>-01.29 1 65% 34.92 .35.60 1.10% .. ... 33.85 34. 18 -0.93 % 123.70 123.70 26. 02% $1,521 .95 $1 667.50 43. 66% s i;'203.s8 $ 1 ,146.79 14 59% .. $332.66 $394.20 84.58% $250.67 $284.56. 4 7.22% $288.69 $71 0 .76 151.77% $ 1,243.64 $ 1, 505.80 36. 05% $308.93 $665.22 146 85% $265 .93 $265.36 1 7.16% 25.40 28. 1 0 1 3 00% "' 22.80 24.80 .06% 1.00 1 .00 nla ,}{so', c-;' '''"' .... ' . .. 2.30 "' -4 17% 15.00 17.00 1 3.33% j 9 .0 0 . 9.00 -18. 18% 66.67% 88.89% n/a 106.89 ,. '.. . 1 18 3)'

PAGE 268

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Service Alea Populalton (000} ScJVice Are a Site (square miles) Passe nger Trips (000) Passenger M iles ( 000) Vehlde Mi. les (000) Revenue Miles (000 ) Vehicle Hours (000) Revenue H o u r s {000 ) Route Miles Tot a l Operating E x p ense (000 ) T ot3f Operaling Expense (00 0 of 1984 $) Tot a l Main ten a n ce Expense {000 } .. T o tal Mainte n ance Expe ns e (000 of 1984 S} Tot"l Capita l Expense (000) T otal local R evenue (000) Operati n g Revenue (000} Pa$s.enge r Fare Revenue$ (000) Tota l E m p byecs T ran sport3tio n Oper3ting E m ployees M 3inten3noe Employees Ad'ministrative Empl oyees V ehicJes Availab le for M aximum Service Vehdes Operated in Maximum Sef\ti ce Spa re Ra;l lo Tota l Gall o n s Consumod ( 000) TABLE lllOZ M a nalee County Transit Purchased Molorbus Perrorman ce Indic-ators 1 987 1 988 1989 199 0 1 81.70 187 .50 192 .69 211 .71 nla nla n/3 n/a 0 .00 0.00 11.66 65. 16 0.00 0 0 0 51. 5 2 274 01 o.oo 0 .00 32.35 51.30 0 .00 0.00 3 0 8 1 48 .84 0.00 o .oo 1.58 2 5 1 o .oo 0 .00 1.4 0 2 .23 0 .00 0 .00 2 . 10 24. 10 $0.00 $0.00 $34.43 $75.80 $0.00 so.oo $26.80 $60.37 $0.00 $0.00 n/a nla $0.00 $0.00 nia n/a so.oo $0.00 n/a nla $0.0 0 $0.00 nla nl a $0.00 $0.00 nia t\/3 $0.00 $0.00 n/a nla 0 .00 0 .00 n/a nla 0 .00 0 .00 .,. nta o .oo 0 .00 n/a n la 0 .00 0 .00 n/ a nla 0 .00 0 .00 2 0 0 2 .00 0 .00 0 .00 1 .00 1.00 nla nl a 100.00% \00. 00% 0 .00 0.00 n/3 nla 1991 1992 19899 2 2 1 5 1 3 215.00 11.58% n/a 747 .00 nla 0 .00 0 .00 nl a 0 .00 0 .00 nla I o .oo 0.00 n/a I 0.00 o .oo nia I 0 .00 0 .00 nl a 0 .00 0.00 nia 0 .00 o .oo "" so.oo so.oo nl a so.oo 5 0 .00 nia $0.00 so.oo nla so.oo so.oo n/a $0.00 so.oo "" so.oo $0.00 n / a so.oo s o .oo n la $0. 0 0 $0.00 nla so.oo s o o o nla so.oo s o.oo n la so.oo s o .oo nia so.oo so.oo n / a 0 .00 0 .00 n/a 0.00 0.00 n l a nla n l a nla nla nla n/a 243

PAGE 269

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ServiGe Aru Population (000) Service Area SiZe {square miles) Panongor Tt%>s (000) Pusongor Miles (000) Vohlol o {000) Rovonuo Mifcs (000) Vehicl e HoutS {000) Rtvtnue Hours {000) Rouco Mires Total Operonjn.g E)lpense (000) To,.l ()po11ting Expense {COO oii9SA $) To&al Mllnlenance Expense (000) Tocal Maintenance Exper.se (000 of 1984 $ ) TotJ1 Ctpbt Expen:$e (000) TOCal Loeil Revenu-e (000) Ope.ra1ing Revenue {000) Pusanget Fare Revenue s (000 ) Tolal Employees Tranap011aUOn Operatin g Employees M aln!enance Employees Admlnltllallve Employees Vthlelta Avall3bl e for Max:imv m SeNice Vthlelta Oper11ted in Ma)(imum Service SpJrl Ratio Gallons C011sumed (000) ------------------------244 TABLE lll-03 Manatee County Transit Sys1en1 Toral Per-rorman Jnditators 1917 1988 1989 1990 181.70 187.50 192.69 211.71 nla n/a n l a n/a 571.30 566.38 57 1.51 592.43 2,774.60 2,279 .98 2 ,488.90 2,491. 1 5 588.10 576.33 557.64 544 .95 532.80 557.26 538.43 525.70 36 .00 35 17 33 99 34 96 34.$0 33 68 32 .68 33.55 167 .20 142.40 147.80 147 .80 $1.160 70 $1.333..34 $1,354.40 $1,400 .82 $1.050.46 $1. 183.26 $ 1,133 19 $ 1,115 76 $213 57 $310 64 nla nil $193 28 $271.01 nla nla $282 30 $615 .33 nla nla $1,100 79 $1. 042 .11 n l a nla $269 49 $ 26$.85 nla nla $226.49 $225.36 n l a nla 32. 30 28.52 nla nlo 29.90 25.30 n la nla 0 00 0.00 n la n/a 2 40 3.22 n la nla 1$ .00 13.00 16.00 17.00 11.00 9.00 9.00 9 .00 36 36% .t4 .44% 77. 78% 8M9% 134 .00 123.25 nil nla ---------' -1991 1992 1987-19 2 215.13 215 .00 18.33% nla 747.00 nla 636 .72 643.17 ' 12.58% '" 2 535.44 2,6 24.13 -5.42% 830 74 566.11 ':' -3 74% 5 14 57 541.29 1.65% 34. 92 35.60 .. 1 10% 33 85 34.18 -(). 93% 123 70 123.70 -2 6.02% $1,521.95 $1, 667 .50 43.66% $1,14 8 79 $1 203.68 $332 .88 SA.$8% $250 .67 $284 56 $288 .69 $710 76 151 77*/t $1.243 64 $1,505.80 36 .0 5 % $308 93 $665.22 146.85% $265.93 $ 265.36 1 7.16% 25.40 2 8 10 13.00 % 22 80 24.80 -11 06% 1 00 1.00 n la 1.60 2.30 -4. 17% 15 00 1 7.00 13.33% 9 00 9 00 -18.1 8% 66. 67% 88 .89% nla 106.89 118.31 .71%

PAGE 270

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUP P L Y M ile s 'Per CaPita ' SERVICE CONSUMPTION P a ssenge r Passeng e r Trip s P e r Revenu e M il e Passenger T ri p $ P e r Reve n ue Ho u r QUALilY OF S ERVICE Average Spee d (R.M.IRH.) Averag o Age o f F leet (ill yea rs} N umbe_r of I n cide n t s ' Tota l Revenue M iles Between I n cid e n ts (0 00) . . . Reve n u e M ites Betwee n Road ca llS {000) AVAILABilrTY R e ven u e Mites Pe r Route Mile (000) TABLE Manatee Coun t y r rans i t Motorbus Effecthcness Me. asures 1987 1988 1989 1990 3 2 4 3-07 2.73 2,33 3 14 3-02 2.9 1 2 .49 1.07 1 .02 1.10 1.11 1 6 5 6 1 6 8 2 17.90 16 ,83 15.43 16 .55 16. 2 3 15 ,23 4 .30 5 .30 5 .22 6 .57 16.00 2 1.00 18.00 8 .00 257 .00 291.00 379.00 352,00 33,28 26.54 28,20 59.61 2 0 7 1.92 1.34 1 .35 3.18 3 91 4,10 3 ,85 1 991 1992 %Change 1987-1992 2A7 2 63 -1Ms% I 2.96 2.99 -4. 66% t.24 1 1 9 1 0,7 5% 18 8 1 18.82 13.64% 15 .20 15,84 2 6 1 % 6.93 6 .4 4 4 9.77 % 12,00 3 .00 81.25% 283.00 230.00 10. 51 % 42.88 t 80.43 442. \4% 1 8 2 2.35 1 3 ,58% 4 .16 4.38 37.40% 245

PAGE 271

E F FECT I VENESS MEASURES SERV I CE S UPPL Y Veh icle Mllt:s Per Cap:ta SERVICE C ONSUM PT I O N Passenger T rips P e r Cap?la P01ssenger Trips Per Revenue Mile Passenger T rips Per Reve n u e H o u r Q U ALilY OF SERVICE Avorag& Spee d (R.M.IR.H.) Ave t 3ge Age of Flee( (i n years) N u m ber o f I ncidents Total Roadcalls R e ve n ue Mile s Between I ncide nts (000) R evcnve Miles Between Roade311S (000) AVAU.ABilfTY Reven u e M iles Per Route Mile (000) 2 4 6 TABLE 111-05 Manate e County Transit Purc hased Motorbus EfrcCCivtness Measures 1 9 8 7 19 8 8 1 989 1 9 9 0 0/a nla 0 1 7 0.2 4 nla nla 0.06 0 .31 n/a nla 0 38 1.33 n/a n/a 8 3 1 29.29 Na n /a 21.9S 21 .9S n/a .,. n/a 5 .00 nla nla n/a n /a nla n /a nla n / a n/a nla n/a n/a n/a n l a nla n/a nla n/a 1.28 2 .03 ----1991 1992 'II Change 1989-19 9 2 n/a .. n/a n / a 0/a .. nl n/a 0/ a nla nla nt3. ...... n/a .. ilia .... ,.. nla ::-: n f a nla nla n/a nla ., nla ,, n / a nla nla n/a n/a nta ... nla fila nla "' n /a '' ;. '
PAGE 272

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY Ve h icle Mi!es Per C apita S ERVICE CONSUMPTION P3sseng e r Trips. Passen ger Trips Per Aevenue Mile Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour QUAL I TY OF SERVI C E Aver3ge Speed (R.M.JR.H.) Average ol Fleet ( i n years) Number of I ncident s Total Roadealls Reve n ue Between (000) Reve n u e Miles Between RoadcJIIs {000 ) AVAILABILITY Reve n ue Miles Per Route Mile (000) TABLE 111 Manatee County Transit System Total Erfec:tiveness Measures 1987 1 988 1989 1990 3.24 3 07 2 .89 2.57 3.14 3.02 2.97 2 .80 1.07 1 02 1.06 1.13 16.56 16.82 f7.49 17.66 15.43 16.55 1 6 .4 7 15.67 4 .30 5.30 n/3 6.18 16 00 21.00 nJa n/a 2 5 7.0 0 291 .00 n/ 3 n/3 33. 28 2 6.54 n/ a n /a 2.07 1 .92 n/3 nlo 3 18 3 9 1 3 .64 3 .56 1991 1992 % Change 1 987-1992 2.47 2 .63 -18 .65% 2 .95 2.99 -4.86 % t.24 1.19 10. 75% 1 8 8 1 18.82 13.64% 15.20 15 .84 2 .6 1 % 6 .93 6 .44 49 77% 1 2.00 3 00 -81.25% 2$3. 00 230.00 1 0 .51% 42.88 1 80:43 1 .82 2.3 5 1 3 58% 4.16 4 .38 37.40/t 247

PAGE 273

248 TABLE lll-07 ManAtee County Transit Directly-Operated Mo t orbus Efficiency Measures E fFICIE NCY MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 COS T E F FIC I ENCY Operal.llg Expense Per Capita $6.39 $7.11 56.85 S6.2 6 $7. 07 $ 7 .76 ; ' n # ,.,._,,.. _..,.,. '' Opertlng Expense Per PekVehicle (000) $105 52 $148.15 $ 1 65 00 $ 1 65 63 $169 1 1 $ 185. 28 75 59% Operating Expens-e Per Passenger Trip $2.03 $2.35 $2.36 "' $2.51 -. $2.59 Ope rating Expense P er Passenger Mite $0 .42 $0.58 $0. 5 4 50.60 50. 60 $0 .64 51.90% . '< .. Operahng Expense Per Reve n ue M il e $2.18 $2 .39 $2 60 $'2. 78 $2.96 $3.08 : 41.33% Ope r ati n g E xpe nse Per Revenue Hour $33 64 $39 59 $42.20 $42 30 $44 96 $48.79 45 01% Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile $0.40 $0.56 $0 73 $0.61 ; $0.65 ,. :. $0. 73 81.58% Maintenance E.xp Per Operating Ex p 18. 40% 23. 30% 27 95% 21, 78% 21.86% 23.64% 28.48% OPERAT ING RATIOS F a r ebox Recovery 1 9.51% 16.90% 1 8.13% 19.0 1 % r.-) 17 .47% 15.91% -18 .45% ->-: ,;._, ,,,, -. Local Reve n ue Per Ope:aling Expense 95. 36% 78.16% 86.49% 92. 83% 81 .71% 90. 30% -5 30% Oper a ting Reve n u e Pe r Ope r a t i ng Expen se 23 22% 20 1 6% 22 4 1 % 22 65% 20.30% ":< 39.89% 71.82% VEH I C L E UTI LIZAT ION Vehicle Miles Per Peak Veh icle (000) 53 .46 64 04 65.66 61.71. : 58.97 62.90; 17. 65% Vehi c l e Ho u r s Pe r Peak Veh i c l e (000) 3 .27 3 9 1 4.05 4 .06 3 86 3 96 20 67% Miles Per Vehicle Miles 0 9 1 0 97 0 .97 0 .97 0.97 0 96 5 60% l .... Reve n ue Miles Per To t a l Veh icles {000) 35 50 42.87 36 26 31.79 34.30 3 1. 84 0.3 1 % Reven u e Hours Pe r Total Vehicles (000) 2 30 2 59 2 23 2 09 2 .26 2 0 1 -12.59% LABOR PRODUCTIVITY "{ ' Reven u e Hours Per Empl oyee (000) 1.07 1.18 1.1 8 < 1.28 1 33 1,, 1.22 't3. 88% A. .,. "''- ''" P assen ger Trips P er EmplOyee (000) 1 7.69 19. 86 21.t6 21.61 25. 07 22.89 29.41% ENERGY UTILIZATION Veh icle M il es Pe r Gall on 4.39 4 68 4.77 4 .87 4 97 ., 4.78 9.02% . FARE Average Far e $0.40 $0.40 $0.43 : $ 0 .48 $0.42 sb: 4 1 4.07% L_=="=-="------------'---=="--L_ __ =_::::__L __________ : ....

PAGE 274

EfFICIEN CY M EASURES COST EFFI C IENCY Op-eratin g Expense Per C3pit a . Operating Expense Per Pe::tk. Ve hicle (000) Oporatin{J ExPense Per Pnsen ger Trip Expe n se Per Pas s e nger M il e Oper a tin g E.xp(lnse Per Revenue Mile . Opotaling E-xpense Per Revenu e Ho u r . . Maintenarloe E xp e n S e Per Reven ue M il e M a i ntenance Exp. Per O p erating E.xp O P ERAT I NG RAT IOS F 3 rebox Recovery l o ca l R eve nue Per Ope rating Expe n s e Oper;U ing Reve n ue Per Operatin g Expense V EHICLE UTILIZATION Vo htde Miles Pet P eak. Vehi cle (000) VehDcle Hours Per P eak Veh icle (000) Revenu e M il es Pe r Vehicle Mlles Revenue Mi l es P e r Tot a l Veh ic le s (0 0 0) R e venue Hou r s Per Tota l Veh icles (000) LABOR P R O DUCTI V ITY Per Emp l oyee ( 000) Passe nger Tr ips Per EmpJoye e (000) E N E RGY UTILI2ATION Veh ic l e Mil e s Per Ga ll o n FARE Average Far e TABLE 111-08 Manatee County Transit Purchased Motorb u s EHiciency Measures 1987 1 988 1 989 1 990 n/a nla $0.18 $0.36 nla nla S3U3 S75.80 n/a nla $2.95 $1.16 n / a nla $0.67 $0.28 n/a n/a $ 1. t2 $1.5$ n/a n/a S24 .52 $34 .07 nta nta n ta n/0 n/a n /a n/a n/a nla nla nla nla n/a n / a n/a nla nla nta nla nla n/a n /a 32.35 5 1.30 nla n t a 1. 58 2 5 1 n/a n / a 0.95 0 .95 n/a n/a 15.41 24.42 nla nta 0.70 1 .1 1 n/a n/a n/a n / a n/a nla n/a n /a n/a nta n l a nla nla nla nla n/a 1991 1992 % Ct\ange 1 989-1992 nta nta n /a nla "'" n/a n/a n/a n ta n/a n/a n / a n la n/a n /a nla nla n l a n/a n/a n / a n/0 n/a n /a nla n/a n / a nla nia nia nla n/a n / a n / a n/a n l a nla n/a n /a n/a nla nla nla n /a n /a nla n /a nla n /a nla "" n /a nta "" n /a n/ a n la n/a nl a nla 2 4 9

PAGE 275

250 EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Operlfng EX'pen$e Per Cepila Oporatlng E Mpen$t Per Peak V e h icle (000 ) Operati n g Per Passenger Trip Operatin g ElCpon.s4 Per Passenger Mite Opemtlng E1epense Per Revenue Mile Oporallng Expense Per Revenue Hour e..-pens.e Pet Revenue M IJe Ma inttnance Exp Per Operating Exp OPERAT1NG RAT10S F lttbox Reawety Local Aev.nue Per OpetaMg Expense Oporallng Revenue P&r Operating Expe n se VEHICI.E UTILIZATION Vthk:Je Milet Per Peak V e hicle {000) Vehide Hours Per Peak Vo hiclc (000) Revenue Miles Per Vehk:le M ile s Revenue Miles Pe r Vehiole:s (000) Rcvonuc t'IOUr$ Per Tota l Vehicles (000) LABOR PRODUCW ITY Reve nue t'f ours Per E mp loyu (000) Paue11ger Trips Per EmplOyee (000) ENERGY UT1LIZATION Vehlcre Miles Per Gallon FARE Aw.IS Fare TABLE lll-09 Manatee Cou nly Transit System Tota l E ffi titnc:y Mcasura 1917 $6 .39 $105 .52 $2 .03 $0,42 $2.18 $33 .64 $0,40 1 8.40% 19.51% 9S 3G% 23.22% 3 .27 0 91 35.50 2 ,30 1.07 17.89 4 ,39 $0,40 1888 $7,11 S148 1 5 $2.35 $0.b8 $2.39 $39.59 $0.56 23. :Jil% 16 .90% 78. 16% 20 .16% 64.04 3.91 0.97 42.87 2 .59 1.18 1 9 .86 4 ,68 $0.AO 1989 S7.03 $150.49 $2.37 S0 .54 $2.52 $41 .44 nla nl "" nl .,. 61.96 3.78 0 .97 33.65 2.04 nla n/a n /a nJa 1990 $6.62 $155.65 $2.36 $0.56 $ 2.66 $41.76 n/a n/a "" of a ota 60.55 3 .88 0.96 30.92 1.97 " nia n/a nla 1911 $1.01 $169.11 $2.39 $0.60 $2.96 $44.96 $0.65 2 1.56 % 17 ,..,., 81.71% 20.30% 58.97 3 .88 0 .97 3 4 ,31) 2 .28 1.33 25 .07 4 .97 SO.A2 1992 $ 7,7 6 $185.28 $2.59 $0.64 $3.08 $48.79 $0.73 23.64% 15.9t% 90.30% 39.89'1. 62.90 3.96 0.96 31.84 2.01 1.22 22.89 4.78 $ 0 41 % Chang 1987-19$2 21A1% 75.59% 27.61% 51.90% 41.33% 45,01% 81.58% 28.48% -18 .45% -5.30% 71.82% 17.65% 20, 87% 5 .60 % 10 .31% 12 .59% (3.88% 29 .41% 9 .02% 4 07%

PAGE 276

GENEilAL QUESTIONS I. Were a ny fare changes made during fiscul year 1992? J f so please provide t he previous fare s tructure as well a s t he updated fare struc t u r e and indicate when the changes were implemented. No changes were made. 2. Were there a n y significant changes in servic-e/service area during fiscal year 1992? None. 3. Have t here been any recent c hanges or s i gnificant e v ents thai may help explain the performance of the trnnsit s>stem'? None. 251

PAGE 277

QUESTIONS A llOUT 1992 SF.:CTION IS DATA I From 1991 to 1 992, the nucnbe. r of vehicle miles, revenue m i les, and vehicle hours i n creased, while r evenue h o urs decreased (see tab le below). These c h anges resulted in a 20 perc ent increase in average speed (revenue miles per re venue hour) from 15.20 mph in 1991 to 18.24 mph in 1992. ls there an exp l ana ti on for thesec hanges? OircttlyOpcrated Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change Vehicle Miles $30 740 $66.110 6.7% Reve n u e M ile $ 5 1 4 .570 563.840 9 .6% Vehicle Hours 34.920 3$. 600 2 0% Revenue Hours 33.850 30. 910 8 7 % System Response: MANC provided updated figures f o r FY 1992 r evenue m i les and revenue h ours of 54 I ,288 and 34, I 79, respectively. The rev i sed data produce a n ave rage speed of approximately 1 5.84 mph for FY l992 which resulls i n a c h ange in average s p ee d from 1991 to 1992 of four percent. Accordi ng 1 0 MANC, the FY 1992 revenue mile a n d revenue hour dala w ere incorTcct due t o a mathcmtuica l er r o r 2. Total operat ing expense increased approximately 10 percen t from $ 1 ,521,950 in 1991 to $1,667 ,500 in 1992, partially due to an 1 8 percen t increase in maint e nance expense dur ing this time ($332,680 in 1991; $394,200 in 1992) Please exp lain t h e inc rease i n mai n t e nance expense as we l l as t h e remaining increase i n operating expense. System Response: The major i ty or the incr ease in to tal operating expe n se is att ributab l e to increases in t hr ee c ost itcms: a S36)330 increase i n the County's accounting/indirect cost (wh ich has s ince bee n reduced in F Y 1 993), a S61,520 i n crease i n maintenance, and a $28,395 increase i n r>crsonnel serv i ce (overt ime, ben efi1S, s a l ary, etc.). Maint enance oost s went up due t o the age and condition of t h e mu e Oird 30 -fo ot in t he fleet During F Y 1992, vehicles e l igib l e for re p lacement were instead maintained si n ce MANC's previous cap i tal g r ant had been c o mp l et e d in 1988. 3 P l e ase explain the s i gnificant increase in capita l expense: rrom $288 )690 in 1991 to $710)760 i n 1992. W h at ca pita l purchases were made i n 19927 Syste m Response; I n FY 1992, the first eapital g rant s i n ce I 988 ..... as approved. T h e most sign ificant purc h ases included three 30-foot Gillig buses a t $ 189,821 e3ch a n d a $35,000 buil ding renovatio n p r oject. 4 T o tal local revenue i ncreased 2 1 percent from $ 1 ,243,640 in 1991 to $1,505,800 i n 1 992, primar ily due to operating revenue more than doubling during this t ime ($308.930 i n 1 991; $665,220 in 1992). P lease exp l a i n the i n creas e in ope rati ng reve n ue. 252 System Response: MANC aurib utes most of t h e increase i n opera ting revenue to an increase i n FOOT a s si s tance from $134,370 if) F Y 199 1 to $259 690 in FY 1 992 an i ncrease in TD funds from $26,824 to $87,447, and an increase in Medicaid funds from $35,500 to $67, 222.

PAGE 278

5. Total employees decreased from 34.95 FTEs in 1991 to 28.10 FTJZs in 1992, due to a 21 pertent decrease in t ransponation operating empl oyees (31.30 FTEs in 1991; 24.80 FTEs in 1992), and a 13 percent decrease in administrative employees (2.65 FTIZs i n 1991 ; 2.30 FTEs in 1992). P lease explain the changes in these employee classifications. System Response: MANC provided an updated total employee figure for FY I 991 of2).40 FTEs. This revised figure indicates hat total employment actually incre-ased _II perc-tnt between the 1991 and 1992 fiscal years. All of this increase is due t o correSJ>Onding increases i n transportation operating and administrative employees. 6. The number of vehicles available for maximum se -rvice increased 13 percent f'rom I S vehicles in 1991 to 17 vehicles i n 1992. In addition, c h e ave(age age of the \'Chicle neet decreased from 6.93 years in 1991 to 6.44 years i n 1992. P lease explain the changes that have occurred in the vehicle inventory. System Response: During FY 1992, three new 30-foot Gill i g buses were delivered. These were replacement however, the vehicles that \\'Cre being replaced remai1led on the inventory until t he y were sold. although they ''"'e r e not actmllly used i n service. As a result the inventory indicated an increase in available vehicles, but the actual number of vehicles used in service remained the same 7 Toto1l gallons consumed increased from 106,890 gallons in 199 1 t o 118,310 gallons in 1992. C
PAGE 279

254 800 600 4 00 200 0 MANAT E E C O UNTY T RAN SI T Performance Indicators Figure 111 County/Service Area Populati o n (000) Figure 111.()2 Passenger T r ips (000) ::1 b P ill I I I I 1 150 1--tE 1.000 3-1 I 8 -800 600 100 400 .. _____ _] ----------so 0 +L 20 0 0 1tt4 IUS 1 ')16 1 917 1!88 1ft') lflO "'' "'Jl 1!84 INS 1986 1')81 1918 1989 1990 1991 1 991 F i gu r e 111 Veh i cle Miles and Revenue M i les Figure 1114 T otal Operat ing Expense s2.00 0 Ts 1 600 1-::_j ., $ 1 2 0 0 ... J ---1-J r r -$400 I J :.i::.:i=:r:"c" ., SO I ---I--I--J--1 r=rJ ] I [ l I -----J I -----!:... -1 ------'--1--$300 S200 $100 so Figure 111-05 Passe n ger Fare Revenues (000) rl r-.. !-... f-1-11()1( (o,(\oiH :1-2. =r: -r-F F 19$4 I')&S 1916 1987 1988 1!8') 1,0 1991 1991 tUO I I)IS ttt6 INJ 1,.8 ''*' 1 '"' 1 ')91 19$4 ,,.s 1 986 1937 1988 "" 0 ' 1 992 Figure 111 Total Employets 401 1 ......-i-20 -10 f.. ( lt!lll; .. .. . -0 1')$4 "U t')U 1 19&$ I')U 19'0 1991 8 4 0 Figu r e 11107 Veh i
PAGE 280

4.0 'f' 3.0 I--2.0 1 0 MAN ATEE COU N TY T RANS IT Figure 111+08 Vehlde Miles Pe r Capita _ J 8 i -1-Effectivene s s Measures F igure 111 Passenger T r ips Per Revenue M il e :::: rn:r rltT J oo-1-l-1-1 -0 .6+--1 l -r----1 o o -0.0 1--J.-1--1-i-1 i U 84 198S 1!86 1 U 1 1988 ,,_, Hl'O '"' 1992 "*" t?ts t9f6 ,,., ''" ,,., '"o '"' "n Figure 111011 F igure 111.010 Aver age Age of F leet (years) 8.0 .--.--.IT -cr...._l 6 0 4.0 2.0 1 -.:f I H-Jd -G"' .............. ..., ....
PAGE 281

2S6 u .oo $6 .00 $4 .00 n .oo $0.00 F igure 111013 Operating Expense Per I / '\J I T J I ---------I ,,. ttn ,,. '"' ,,., ' ''" ' un 1,500 1,2 00 goo 6 00 lOO 0 Fig-ur e llt-019 R e v enue Hours P e r E mploye e ( fl:lll .... -................... 0'\0 ) tnt IUS UU lJU ltU "" "" 1ttl tftJ MANA TEE COUNTY TRANSIT E fn cic ncy Meas ures Figure 111 Ope riling h p e n.se Per Passenger Trip Sl.OO $ 2.00 b ,... r r 51.00 $0.00 +--ttM '"' '"' 1JI1 .. "" 1990 , "" 2Sll 2011 5"4 10% S% 0% F ig u r e 111 F -arebox Recovery R a tio kd;' I -------r-.... ------== -----.. ... ..... :; .... ,::. ?--=----...-1N4 1t1S '"' 1N7 1tll ,., tttO ttt1 1"2 2 0 ,000 15,000 10,000 s.ooo 0 figure 111.020 Pusenger T r ips Pe r Emp lo yee '...-1 \ 1 b l -1 # -<.. 1'10-lt ... ..... ) ----'""' 1 M I tf,M. 1M1 U N 19:n "" lttl Itt! Figur e 111 Operating Expense P er Reven-ue M i le $4.00 $1.00 $2. 00 ....... ----. 51.00 1 ----1-----$0 .00 -utt 'as u" ' "" "" tHO '"' nn f igur e 1 1 1.018 V e h lde M iles Per Puk Veh icle I I I I I I I I I M 40 ,000 2o.oool--l --l-t-l-l l I o l --11-+--" IHS 19 16 ltU 1tll 1ttt 1tt0 1tt1 1',:t $0.$0 S0 40 $0.30 $0.20 S0 1 0 so.oo Figu r e 111.()2.1 A v er a ge fare ... -. -( NOIII l ) IJtf HIS 19 M l M ) 1Mt lMt ,,. ltfl 1M2

PAGE 282

MANC SUMMARY Total ope r a tin g expense incre-ased 10 per cent from $1,521,950 in 1991 to $1,667 .500 in 1992, pania lly due to an 1 8 pe r cent incre-ase in maint e nance expense during t h is time (S332,680 in 1991; $394 200 in 1992). MANC aur i b u t e d t he increase i n m a i n t enan c e expense t o the age and condit ion of t he Olue Bird 30foot veh icles i n the f leet The remaini ng incre ase in operati n g expense resulted from an increase in the County s accountinglindir,-tt costs a n d an i n crease in personne l service c o s t s. Tota l capita l expense i n creased signifi c a n tly f rom $288 690 in 1991 to $7 1 0,760 i n 1 992, an incr e a s e of 146 perc.ent. Til i S increase can be auributed to MANC' s p urchns e of t h ree 30 -foot G ill i g b u ses and a build ing r e n ovation p roj<.-ct duri n g FY 1992. Tot al l ocal revcnm: i nc r eased 2 I percent f ro m $1,243,640 i n 1991 to $1,505,800 i n 1992, due t o a 115 pe r cent incr ease in opemting r evenue d u ring t h i s time ($308,930 i n 1991 : $66 5 ,220 i n 1992) Acco r ding t o MANC. the increase i n O J>Crating re"enue primar i l y resul ted rrom increases in FOOT assistance, TO funds, and McXIicaid funds. The number of vehicles a v ailable for maximum sefvice i n creased 13 percent ( r om 15 vehicles in 1991 to 17 vehi cles in L992. MANC indicated that the three new buses delivered in F Y 1992 wer e r ep l aceme n t vehic l es ; however the veh icles that wer e being replaced had 10 remai n on the inve n tory u n t i l they were so l d despi te n o t being used i n ser vice. The. number or inc i dents decreased 75 percent t fo m 1 2 inc i dents i n I 99 1 to 3 inci dents i n I 992. I t is believed tha t conti nuous drive r tra ining may h a v e con tr i buted to t h i s decl ine. 'l'he number or roadcaUs dec r eased f rom 2 83 ronde-ails i n I 991 t o 230 roadcnlls in 1992. a dec l ine of app roximately 19 pertcnt. MANC mtributc..xl this decline to the three new buses t hat were rctcived i n FY I 992 257

PAGE 283

P. SMYRNA TRANSIT SYSTEM SYSTEM l'llOFILE Organizational StructureSmyrna Transit System is operated as a department of the City of New Smyma Beach. Go\'erning Uody and Com nos ilion The system director, appointed October 1 1989. a lso oversees the airport and manages the City Industria l Park. Because Smyrna Transit System is a depanm ent of the City, it is directed t hrough the office or the City Manager. Servi c e A rca SMTS was crc .ated t o provide pub lic transportation services to the resi den ts and vtsitors of New Smyrna Beach. ModesThe system o nly provides fixed-route motorbus services ) however, SMTS will alter routes upon request to provide door-to-door service for any persons. Pri or notification is required for this service because of the necessary route changes. is an addi1ional charge for t his service. 258

PAGE 284

PERFORMANCE IND ICATORS 1987 SofViCC Area PopUiation (000) 15 .34 Service Are a Siz e (squar e miles} 1\/3 Passenger T rips (000) 34.30 Passengec Miles (000) 16 7 .80 Vehlcle M iles (000) 8 9 1 0 Reve n u e Miles (000) 86.50 Vehi c l e (000} 4.80 Reven u e Hours {000} 4 .60 Ro u t e Miles 52. 0 0 ToM.I Operatin g Expense (000) $127. 6 0 Total Operating Expense (000 of t9S4 S } $115. 4 8 Tota l M a in t en a n c e ExpefiSe (000) $43.38 Total Maintenance Expense (00o o f 1 984 $) S 39.2 6 Tota l C a p ital Ex p ense ( 000) $0 .00 T otal Local Revenue {000) $72.35 Operating R e venue (000) $18. 25 Pass.enger Fare R o v c nue$ (000) $18. 1 2 Total Emp loyees 5 3 1 Transporta6on Operatin g Employe e s 3 .50 Employees 0.60 Admi nistrat ive Employees 1 2 1 Ve hic les Availab l e f o r Max-imum Servi ce 2.00 Ve h icles Operated in Maxim u m Service 2 00 Spare Ftatio 0.00% Total Gallon s Consumed (000) 1 2.60 TARLE 111P l Smyrna Transit System Perrormance I ndicators 1988 1989 1 5 6 5 1 6.15 1\/ a n /a 33. 0 7 31.SO 166 1 2 158.30 89. 06 8 7 .50 86.53 8 1. 2 5 4 .81 4.15 4.55 4.50 52. 00 5 2 .00 S140.45 $ 1 58.38 $12 2 .53 $132. 5 1 $ 46.0 3 $3 4 .2 0 $40. 1 6 $28.61 so.oo $ 1.45 $86.08 $156.8 1 $16.51 $ 1 6 1 1 $ 1 6 5 1 $ 1 5.32 4.31 1 0 .00 3 .50 5.00 0 .60 4.00 0 2 1 1.00 2 00 2 .00 2 .00 2 .00 0 00% 0 00% 1 2.20 '12 .58 1990 1991 1 992 % Change 1987 1 6 .45 1 7 .08 17. 08 11.37 % 1\/ 3 nla 1 9 00 n/a 25 29 23.30 22 .77 -33.62% 1\/ 3 65 .52 63.98 6 1.87 % 87.75 7 6.S7 69.7 4 1.7 3% 82.5 0 48.6 3 55.43 35.92% 5 0 2 5.0 2 4.5 8% 4.$0 3 1 1 4 .52 78% 52.00 5 2.00 55.00 5.77 % $172.00 $191 22 $ 18 2. 1 6 42.76% $ 137.00 $144.08 $131. 49 13.86% S35.S5 $34. 43 S28.94 -33.29% $2 8.64 $25. 9 4 $ 20 .89 46 19% SB4.78 $0.00 $0. 0 0 I\! a $170 .43 $ 17 1 22 $18 2 1 6 1 51.78% $14 .83 $14. 2 5 $13.92 $14 .83 $ 1 4 2 5 $ 13.92 16% 11.00 5 0 0 3.11 -41.4 3% 5.00 4 0 0 3. \1 lt.t4% 4 .00 0 00 0. 00 .00% 2 .00 1 00 0 00 -100.00% 2 .00 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 % 2 .00 2.00 2 00 0 .00% 0.00% 0 .0 0% 0 00% n / a 1 2 .42 1 2 75 1.47 .$. 98% ------------------------2 $9

PAGE 285

EFF EC T I V E NES S M EASURES S E RV I C E SUP PLY Vehicle Mile s Pe r Cap ita S ERVI C E CONSUMP TIO N Passenger Trips Pet C-apita Passenger Ttips Per Revenue Mile Passen g e r Trips Pet R e venue Hour QUALITY O F SERV I CE Avetage Speed (R.M.IR H ) Averag e Age o f F lee t (in y ears) Numbot o f I n cide nts Total Roaccaus Revenue Miles Between I ncidents (000) Revenu e M j)Cs Between RoadcaU.S (000 ) AVAILABILITY Reven ue Miles Per Rout e Mile ( 000) 260 1987 5 8 1 2 24 0.40 7 .46 18.80 6 .00 1.00 18.00 86.50 4 6 1 1 .66 TABLE IIIPZ Smyrn:' Transit EfftcCive:ness Measures 1988 1989 5 69 5 .42 2 1 1 1.95 0 36 0.39 7.27 7 .00 1 9 02 1 8 .06 7.00 8.00 3 .00 1.00 . 4 .00 9 .00 28.84 81.25 2 1 .63 9 .03 1 .66 1 .56 1990 199 1 1 99 2 ' 1987-19 2 5 33 4 .50 ..... -. 4 .08 2 9 72% : .. 1.54 .. 1 .36 1.33 ..... -40 .. 111110%, 0 3 1 0.48 0.41 3 .59% 5 .62 7.50 5 .04 .. 32.42 % 1 8 33 15 .66 1 2 :27 _, -34 76% 9 .00 1 0 00 11. 00 83. 33% 2.00 1.00 1 .00 0 00% . .. > .. 1 0 .00 15 00 9.00 4 1 25 48.63 < {-' > ... 55.43 .. .92% 8 25 3 2 4 6.1 6 28 1 6% ... .. 1 .59 0 94 1 0 1 -39 42% -----

PAGE 286

EFFI C I ENCY MEASURES COS T E FFIC I E NCY ' Operatin g Expens e P e r Capi t a ' Operati n g Ex pen se P e r Pea k V c h k: le (000) Oper ating Expense Tfi> Operating Expense Per Pass eng er M ile Ope r ati n g E xpe nse Per Reven u e M ile Oper a ting E x p ense Per Reven u e Hou r M a i nle n a nco Expanse P e r Re venue M ile Mai n t e n a nce E.xJ). Per Operating E xp OP E RATING RATIOS F are box Recovery R e venue Pe r Operat in g Exp ens e Oper aling R ev e nue Pe r O paratil'l g EJcp e o s e VEH I C L E UnUZAT I O N Veh icle Miles Pet Pea k Ve hicl e (000) Veh icle Hours Per P e ak Vehicl e (000) Revenu e M iles Per Mil e s Reve n u e Mil e s Per Tota l Vehicl es (000) Revenue Hours P e r Total Veh icles {000 ) LABO R PROD UCTIV IT Y Revenu e Hours Per Employee (000) Passe nger Tr ips Pet E m ployee {000) E NERGY UT I L ilA TION Vehicie Miles Per G allon FAR E Average Fa re -----1987 $8,32 $83,80 $ 3 7 2 $0,76 S t A 8 $ 27,74 $0,50 34.00% 14.20% 56.70% 100% 44.55 2 .40 0 .97 43.25 2 ,30 0,87 6.46 7,07 $0,53 TABLE 111-1'3 Sm yrna Trans it Sys t em Erficicnc::y Mea s ures 1 988 19 8 9 $8,97 $ 9 ,80 $ 7 0 2 3 $79, 1 9 $4,25 $5,03 SMS $LOO $ 1,62 $1,95 $3 0,87 $35,19 $0,53 $0,42 3 2 77 % 2 1 .59% 11.76% 9 67% 6 1.29% 99 .01% 1 1.76% 10.17% 44,53 4 3,75 2 .4 1 2,38 0,97 0,93 43.27 40,63 2 ,28 2,25 1 ,06 0 A 5 7 ,67 3,15 7,30 6,95 $0,50 $0,49 1 9 9 0 1 99 1 199 2 % Chanie 1987-19 2 $ 1 0 ,4 5 $11,19 S l 0,66 28.18% $86,00 $95, 6 1 S9 L08 42.76% $6,8 0 $8, 21 $8,00 115. 0 7% i n/a $2,92 $2,85 274.44% i $2,08 $3,93 $3, 2 9 122 7 8% $38,22 $61,57 540. 32 45.35% 50.44 $0,7 1 $ 0,52 4.10% : 2 0 9 1 % 18.01% 15 ,89% --53.27% 8 6 2 % '/. 45% 7 64% 46. 17% 99,09% 89.54% 100,00% 76, 3 7 % 8 .62 % 7 ,4 5 % 7 .64% ..46. 55% 43,68 38.44 34.87 ,21,73% 2 ,38 2 5 1 2.51 41.58% 0 ,94 0 ,63 0 79 1 8 .13% 4L25 2 4 ,32 27,71 -35.92% 225 1,55 2 26 -1.78% 0,41 0,62 1 .45 67.70% 2,30 4 ,66 7,32 13.33% 7 ,07 6,03 6,0 8 -14 0 1 % $0,59 $0, 61 $0. 6 1 15.77% ----------261

PAGE 287

GENERAL QUESl'IONS I. Were a n y fare changes made during fisc.a1 year 1 992? If so. please provide the previous far e structure as well as the updated fare structu r e and indicat e when the c hanges were implcmcntt.'
PAGE 288

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1 992 SECf!ON IS DATA I. As indicated in the table below, revenue m iles increas<.:d sign ificantl y whi le vehicl e miles de crea sed. which resulted in a significant decline i n the number of deadhead m i les bet, .. een 1991 and 1992. P l ease expl a i n how this improvement i n deadhead mileage was achieved. Dlreetly-Oper ate d Motorbus FV 1 99 1 F'( 1 992 %Chan ge Vehk:te Mi les 76,870 69, 740 9 .3% R eve nue Miles 46,630 55,430 14. 0% Veh i cle Hours, 5 ,020 5 ,020 0.0% I Reve nue Ho v rs 3 110 4,520 45.5% System Response: The imp rovement in deadhea d mileage c .an be a uributed to t h e improved qual i ty m a inte nance effort employe d by the C ity' s garage depan rncnt, which is opera ted as a d ivision of Publi c W orks. TI1 i s i mproveme n t ,.,..as achieved despite no upgrades or r eplacement of ve h icles dur ing FY 1992. 2 Desp ite the n ine pe rcent decline in vehi cle mil es, vehicle hours remained constnnt at 5,020 hours betwee n I 991 and 1992 ( se e table above). Is there an expla n a tion? Syste m Re-Sponse: Vehi c l e hours as reported in both FY 1991 and FY 1 992. are stated in lemls of scheduled hours. Oue to staffing and resource constmi.us, data collect ion of tteHI:II vehicle hours is not possible. 3. T h e service supply data in t h e previous table indicate t h at revenue hour s increased a t a grea t er r ate t han rev enue m iles. ll\is resuhed i n a sig,nificimt decline in avc.rage speed (revenue miles per r evenue hour) from IS.66 mph in 1991 t o 12.27 mph i n 1992. Please cxpl:'li n Sys te m Respo1lse: According to SMTS, the improved qual ity maintenance effort discussed i n the response to question # J a l so impacu:d this change Due to the imp roved rel i abilit y of the fleet, vehicle revenue hours ;md revenu e miles a l so impr oved 4. Tota l opentting expe nse decreased from $191 ,220 in 1991 to S 1 82,160 in 1992 p rimarily due to a 16 percen t decl ine in maintenance expense li-om $34.430 in 1991 lO $28,940 i n 1 992. Please expl a i n the dec rease in maint e nance expense as well as the remaining decrease in ope r ating expense. System Response: T h e dec l i n e i n maintenonlce expense can be cred i ted t o t he gnrage dcll artment's improved q u a l it y m
PAGE 289

6. Total gallons consumed decreased 10 percent from 12,750 gaiJons in 1991 to I 1,470 gallons in 1992. Can this decline in fuel consumption be attributed to the decrease in vehicle m iles discussed previously, o r is there some other explanatjon? System The decrease in gallons consumed can be attributed to the corresponding decrease in vehicle miles between t he 199 J and J 992 fiscal years. 7. The number ofroadcalls decreased from IS in 1991 to 9 i n 1992. T o what can this decline be attributed? System Response: The decline in roadcaHs can also be attributed to the improved quaJity maintenance effon discussed in the response to question t/J. 264

PAGE 290

100 80 60 40 20 0 S M YRNA TRANSI T SYSTEM Figure IIIP1 City/Service Area Popu la t ion (000 ) 2 0 JI1 t1 6 1 2 ---1 . j 8 4 0 ''*" ltSS 1t14 tU7 U 19&9 1 990 199 1 1991 F i g u r e III P 3 Performance lncJic:lttors F igure IU P 4 Figure IIIP2 Passen ger T r ips { 000) ::.w-.t : I r rn 20 -"--1-1 1-1 -1-10 1-o l I I I 1984 1,$$ 1914 19f1 lUI 1'*' 1990 1"1 1Hl F igure III PS V e h i cle M i les and Rev e n u e Miles Tota l Expens e Passenger Far e Revenues (000 ) I 11 ...... .. .. .... ___ .. -\ --I I I. . $20 0[--, $ 1 60 ----b i 1 j .. ... I ... ..... .. suo' . ..... S8DI--v-1 ... I -_, __ r41110l..,VoOl'90>',.1!1(!10) so SlSr l l -TTT1 r -T T S 1 S 1 1 --1 .. $101--l-!--rT -----!-+ s s !--1-[' ,.--1 .. t 1 1 19&4 l9SS 19&6 1 9 U t 9 U ''*' 19') 0 t H t tUl 1 9 W I U S 1SU 1981 19U UU 1990 1 991 t99l 19U IUS 1'14 1 UU " 1990 1,.,1 19tl Figure lii P6 Total Employe e s 12 .,......,..-,--.,-.....,..-, 9 '--1 --'1 --U
PAGE 291

266 SMYRNA TRANSIT SYSTEM 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 Figure 111-PB Vehicle Miles Per Capita ..... : -' I I I i -1984 1tll 19-" tnt 19U t9tt tHO ,,, 1992 12.0 9 0 6.0 ],0 0.0 Err('<'(ivcncss Figure III P9 Pas senger Trips Per Revenue Mile 0.5 I j "" ;;---I I -1-0.4 0 ] 0 1 0.1 -o.o -,,.. 1 9$5 ,,.,. "" ,,.. '"" 1990 ,,, '"2 Fi9ure lli P 1 0 Age of F eet (yeats> ---I ___ I U IUS , ... 19t7 t9t* 19tt 1 110 19JI ''" Figure IIIP11 Figure IIIP12 Revenue Miles 8etwee" Acddents/ln(idents Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls 100,000 2S,OOO ..... lr\ 'J\ L / ...... t. I C ... off ,,. ... ) -80,000 60 ,000 40,000 20,000 0 20.000 15.000 1 0 000 5 ,000 -\ \ I-1'\. ..... J 0 "" tns t9t6 uu ''" ,,.., '"o ,,, wn ,,., tns ''" nt1 "" '"' '''o ,,, '"2

PAGE 292

Flgur III P13 Operating Expense Per Capita $12.00 -r-T JJ jdtj S9.00 ..... -l $6.00 --$3.00 --so.oo -I -tU.t UlS 1986 1987 193.S 1989 1 0 WH U') Figure llf..P16 Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile $0.80 J I 1 / v I"' ... J $0. 60 $0.40 --1----1-J . . 1 .. $0. 20 i $0.00 ,,.. 1Ml ,,. 1981 "" ,,., 1n9 ,,, Flgur III P19 Revenue Hours Per E mployee .-rn --r I 1 200 1 _ - soo l--1--1 ---J -] I I 1 -400 1-----I 1 o 1-+--l---1-_o::l -:-;" aa4 nas "" 1n1 ,"' nn 1no ,,,, S M YRNA TRANSIT SYS T E M Erticiency Me.a.sures f i gure lllP14 Opera t ing Expense Per Passenger Trip S10 .00 58.00 I =bll S6.00 --,_ ' : 1 ' ---8--f-. i i --5 4.00 S2.00 $0.00 tno 1ti"S t98G 19U "" "" 1910 " 2 Figure IIIP17 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20%-r-n J 16Yol 1 +-_t;:[ ==-j = 12!1----1 -Sll 4% 1 1-1 ' 0% 1 I j l i ttl4 t!I&S. t'JSO ,,., IUJ 1WI t991 8 ,000 6,000 4,000 2 0 0 0 0 F igure IIIP20 Passengor T r ips Per Empl oyee ---I ------1 ----J ,,. ... ,,.s ''" ,,., ,,., ,,., 1 ,o ,,, ,,n F igure IIIP1S Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile S4 00 1 1--... t iTtl. Sl.OO S2.DD S1.00 $.0.00 151 4 I\18S 19U 1 ')$1 HU Hltt 1jl')O 1991 19tl Figure IU-P1 8 Vehide M il e s Per Peak Vehicle so.ooo.,-,jil-r r 40.00 0il---' : l 30.000 !---1-,. -, ..... --20.00 0 I -. . . o .ooo r --L --n -1 .1 ____ o !-j ... I 1H4 19JS IU6 "81 lta8 1Ut 19\10 U'9t ltU Figure 111-P21 Average Fare so.soK I I j 1 11-1 S0.60 I ""tVt-j-i --H -L-1 .. 1. ... $0.40 so.zol--f 1--l-1---1---....... so.oo 1-- -l---!--1--1 -f--; .... 19&4 nu nn 1n1 '"'' "" n
PAGE 293

SMTS SUM MAllY 268 Both revenue miles (48,630 in 1991; 55,430 in 1992) and revenue hours (3,110 in 1991; 4,520 in 1992) increased s i gnificantly between 1991 and 1992 despite declining vehicl e miles and stnblc vehicle hours. According to SMTS, these chomgcs and the Stlbscqucnt improvement in deadhead miles and hours can be attributed t o an improved quality maintenance effort by the City's garage department. T o tal maintenance expense decrea.ed 1 6 percent from $34,430 in 1991 to $28,940 in 1992. SMTS also attributed this decline to the garage department's improved quality maintenance effort. To t a l employee. decreased 38 percent from 5 0 FTEs in 1991 to 3 1 1 FTEs in 1992 due to a decli ne in transport ation operating personnel (4.0 FTEs in 1991; 3.11 FTEs in 1992) and the elin)ination of administrative F rr::s (1.0 FTEs in 1991; 0.0 FTEs i n 1 992) llte decline in trans portation opera ti ng personnel resulted from a general reorganization of t h e City in May 1991 during which a full-time po sitio n was reclassified for parttime status. The loss of the administrative posi1ion was the result of a resignation in FY 1992. Total gallons consumed d ecreased from 12,750 gallons in 1991 to 11,470 gallons in 1992; a decline often percent. SMTS indicated that this decline i n fuel consumption was due to the decrease i n total vehicle miles during this time. Total roadcalls decrea'ied 40 percent from 1 5 roadcalls i n 1991 to nine roadcalls in 1992. lll e decline in roadcaiJs was also attributed to the garage dcparlment's improved quality maintenance effort.

PAGE 294

Q PASCO AREA TRANSPORTATION SERVICE SYSTEM PROFILE Ors::aniutiona l Struc::turr -Pasco Area Transporuuion Service is a division of Pasco County government Coverning Oodv and Composition -The transit system is governed by the Pasco County Commission which is comprised of five county commissioners. Service Area -111e Pasco service is provided to the West Pasco Urbanized Area. Since J'me 30, 1990. only dernand-rc:sponse services have been provided. Prior to that time, lhnited fixed-route motorbus was providell. 269

PAGE 295

PE RFORMANCE INDICATORS 1 987 Servtce Ales Populalion {00 0 ) 0.00 ServiceArea Size { squara miles) n/a Passenger Trips {000) 0.00 Pa ssenger Mi tes (000) 0.00 Vehicle Miles (000) 0.00 R e venue Miles {000) 0 00 Vehicle Ho urs (000) 0.00 Revenue Ho u r s ( 000 ) 0 .00 Roule Miles 0.00 Total Operat i n g Expense {000} so.oo T olal Oporat i n g Exp e nse (000 o f 198 4 $) $0 .00 Tota l Ma i ntenanco Expense (000) so.oo T ola l M a i nt enan ce Exp ense ( 000 of 1984 $) $0.00 Totat Capita l Expense ( 000 ) s o .oo Tolallocal Revenue (000) $0.00 Operat ing Reven ue (000 ) $0.00 fare Revenues (000) so.oo Total Employees 0 .00 T ransportation Opetatlng Employees 0 .00 Maintenance Employees 0 00 Admini s l t a t ivc 0.00 Vehide s Available for Maximum Service 0.00 Vehdes Operated in Maximum Sorviee 0 .0 0 Spar e Ratio n/a Tot a l G allons Co n s u med (0 00) 0.00 270 TABLE 111-Ql Pasco Area Trans i t Syslcm Pc:rrormancc Indicators 1988 1 989 0.00 272.42 nla n/a 0. 00 42.44 0 00 318 1 6 .. 0 .00 106.95 0 .00 98. 33 o.oo 6.92 0 .00 6 .51 0 .00 63.00 so.oo $314.15 so.oo .. $26 2. 84 so.oo $1. 63 so.oo $1.36 50.00 5 39.56 50 .00 . 59 2 .$4 so.oo S t 8.71 $0 .00 $18.7 1 0 .00 n/a 0 .00 nla 0 .00 n/a o.oo n / a o.oo 6.00 0 0 0 4.00 .. n /a 50 .00% 0.00 . n/a 1990 28 1 .13 nla 47.28 354.60 97.6Q .. 93.49 6A7 6.1 9 63.00 $290.S2 $231.6( 5 1 .2 6 51. 00 $ 1 6.45 $61.66 $21. 20 $2 1 20 n /a nla n/a : n/a 6.00 . 4 00 SO.OO% n/a 1991 1992 1 989-19 2 0 00 o .oo n /a nla 0 .0 0 n l a 0.00 '' 0.00 nla . 0 00 0 0 0 n/a '-;-, .. 0.00 ;1 ,_,:. 0 .00 $ "' ... .. 0 00 0 00 n/a 0 0 0 0 00 n/a .. 0 0 0 0.00 nla 0 .00 0.00 n/a 1 $0 00 $0 0 0 n/a : ... . *"" / _,_, -. so.oo ;' $ 0 00 n/a . $0.00 $0.00 n/a so.oo $0.00 n/a $0 00 $0. 00 n/a $0.0 0 ;:,.._ $0. 00 n/a $0.00 $0 .00 "' $0.00 $0.00 n/a j 0 00 0 00 n/a ,. o .oo I 0 00 nlo I 0 .00 0. 00 n/a ., 0 00 ?:.t'' r .. -. :"".:..,. _,,o.O:Q .... i ''i nfa 0 .00 0 .00 n/a .. 0 .00 :'', 0.90 nla n/a n/ a n /a I 0 00 , ;., n/a 1

PAGE 296

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVIC E SUPPLY V&hicle M iles Per capita SER VICE CONSUMPT ION Passenger Trips Per capila Passe n g e r Trips Per Revenue Mile Passenger ir4>s Per Revenue HoU r QUALITY OF SERV I CE Ave"'ge Speed {R.M.JR. H.) .. Average Age o f Flee t (ill years} Number or lnclclents Total Roadcal!s Reveoue M iles Between Incidents {000) Revenue Miles Between Roadealls (000} AVA ILABI L ITY Revenue Miles Per Route Mile (000) ---------------1987 nlo nla nla nla nla nl a n/a nl3 nla n/a nla TABLE 111-Q2 Pasco Area Transit System Effectiveness Measures 1988 1989 nlo 0 39 nla 0.16 nlo 0 43 n la 6.52 nla 15.10 nla 17 .67 n la n la nla nla n/a nla nla n la nla 1.56 1990 1991 1992 "!.Change 1989-1992 0 .35 nla nla nlo 0 .17 nla n la nla 0 5 1 nla nla nla 7.6 nla nla nla 1 5 1 0 nla nla nla 18.67 nla n la nta nla nl 3 n la nla nla nl a n la "'' n/a nla n/a nla n/a nla nla nla 1.4& nJo n la nla ---------------271

PAGE 297

EFFICIENCY MEASURES 1987 COST EFFI CIENCY Operaling ElC'pense Per Capita n / a Operat in g Expense Per Peak Vehicle (000) n / a Opera t in g E xpense Per Pass enge r T rip nla Opculling Expense P ar Passe n ger Mi5e nta Operating Exl)(:nse Per Revenue Mile nlo Opera t in g E xpens e Per R evenu e Ho u r nla Maintenance E-x.pense Ptr Rovenu& M il & nta Mainte nance Exp Per Opetaling Ex::p. nla OPE RATING RATIOS F arebox R ec o very n/a L ocal Revenue Per Opera t ing Expense nla Opera tin g Revenue Per Ope r a t ing Ex pense nla VEHICLE UTILIZA T I ON Vehi cle Miles Per Pe .. k Vehi c le (000 ) n/a Ve h icle Hours Per Peak Ve hicle (000) n/a R&vGnu e M iles Pe t Vehicl e Miles nla Revenue Pet Tol31 Ve h icles (000 ) nla Reve n u e H o u rs Per Total Ve h icle s { 000) n /a LABOR PROOUCTMlY Revenue Hours Per E m p loyee (000. ) n / a P asseng e r Trips Per Employee ( 000) n/a ENERGY UT I L I ZA TION Ve h icle M il es Per G a l lo n n/a F AR E Average Fa re n /a 272 TABLE 111-QJ Art-a Transit System Effic-iency Me asures 1988 1 989 n /a $1 IS n/a $78 .54 n/e '$7.40 nla $0.99 > n/a ; $3.1 9 ... nto $48.26 nla $0.02 nla O.S2% n/a 5 .96% n/ a 2 9 .46% iva nla 26. 74 n/o 1.73 n l a 0 9 2 n l a 1 6 .39 n la 1 .09 n ta nlo n/a nlo n/a "" n/a 1990 $ 1.03 $ 72.7 1 . $6.15 $0.82 $3.11 $46. 9 7 $0. 01 0.43% 7.29% 28.09% ':--:><. .., i<., *-7.29% 2 4.40'. 1.62 0 .96 15 .58 . 1.03 nla n/a -nla _;"-,:. ';.-$0.45 1 9 9 1 1992 % 1989-1 9 2 n/a n/a n/a ..... nta nta n/a .. ". .,._, n/a v,,;t: ''"-n/a )'_ 'nla . ;,, n/a n/a nt a _, v ., ,_, " > ..... n/a J'l!.a' i < "'.nla . .,. .-: -. .;.; nta n/a nla n/a nlo nla n/a n la nla nla .. .nta n/ a .. n/a n/a n la I . ,_ . ,.,., .. 't' '''nla "'f .n/a .. nlo nta' n la nta nla nla .. nla . :,_ nla nla nta nta n l a :: nta: .; : n t a.< '<-' nla _,' ' n fari -r .... .... rJ n/<( nla n l a n /o nta "" F:;nta nra . nla -->. ., .. n ta

PAGE 298

GENERAl Q UEST IONS NOTE: No q uestio n s COilCeming general system c h aracteristics or 1992 Section 15 data were asked of PCTS since t he system disc ontinued i t s operation of fixed route ser vice in June 1 990 due to poor r i dership. This s ervice h a s sinc e been replaced with demand-response service, w hich began ope r ating i n D ecemb e r 1990. Despile this change in service, PCTS was s tiiJ included in t h i s report so that its direc-tly-operated motorbus d ata for I 989 and 1 990 would be rcn<.-.;tcd in the statewi de totals for t hese two years. 273

PAGE 299

2 74 PA SCO AREA TRA N SPORTA T IO N S E RV I CE Fig u r e III QI County f Sei'Vi
PAGE 300

PASCO AREA TRANSPORTATION SERVICE 0.4 0 3 0.2 o 0.0 EffecOvcness Me-asures f i gure 111 .{)7 Vehicle Miles Per Capita 1'-----1--f-. -----uu 1 9 11 uu ,,., ,,.. ''*' t ttll ,,,2 f i gure II IQ S Trips Per Revenue Mile 0 6 [:1 0.4 0.2 f----0.0 .... .. ... - M 4 . . ... . ., .. l!lts ,,., 1 9 0 ,. .. ,,., 19?0 , ,,2 20.0 1 6.0 12.0 8 0 4.0 0.0 Figure IIIQ9 Average Age of F lee t (years) -r-l= ---1 1-1 ---;-1984 nu ' ,,., ttU ttU ,,a '''' tttl 275

PAGE 301

276 PASCO AREA TRANSPORTATION SERV I CE S1. 20 S0.90 O SMO 0 I $0.30 $0.00 Figure I I I Q10 Operating Expense Per capita I l' ---.. -->-I_J ,,.. n n ''" nn 1tn '"' 1 '''' '"' F i gure IIIQ 12 Efficiency McasurtS Figure IIIQ11 Operat i ng Expense Per Passenger Trip $8.00 $6.00 l $4.00 -----,_ -$2.00 $0.00 19" I!BS t!t& lta7 IJU 1989 1,1 1991 Figure 111-Q13 Operating Expense Pe r Revenue M i le Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile Fig ure III-Q14 Farebo x Recovery Ratio S4 .00 i _ $3.00 1--; 52.0 0 -$ 1 .00 1 ... so.oo.l-$0.03 -1-1--l--i=l-1--1 $0.02 $0.01 so.oo I ---r---I ---J -[ -1 --r-t: Bll 6l\ 4l\ 2% 0% ---a tns 1U6 '"' nu "*' "'' '"l 1984 1,.5 1 IUJ 1 'J3$ ttn 19 1 1 1992 UN 198S 1tu 1981 1!88 l989 1910 1991 1992 Figure IIIQ15 Vehidc Miles Per Peak Vehicle 30.00 0 I N 20,000 -10,000 I 0 tH4 UtS 19U 19$7 ttU ttU ''"' 1991 so. so $0.40 $0.30 $0.20 S0.10 $0.00 --Figure 111-Q16 Average Fare -----1M4 198S 1986 tn7 Ut8 1989 1tto 1tt1

PAGE 302

PCTS SUMMARY NOTE: D u e to t h e discontinuati o n of directly -operated mot orbus service i n June 1990, performance i n dicator rrends coul d not be analy7.ed for s igniflcam changes f rom 1991 t o 1992. As a resuh no summur y comments coul d be pr o v ided. 277

PAGE 303

R. KEY WEST TRANSIT AUTHORITY SYSTEM PROFILE Organi1.ational StructureThe Key West Trans i t Authority is a depanment of the Cit y of Key \Ve. st. Go\crning Body and Com posiCion -The transit auth ority is directly governed by the Port and Tr:msportation Authority Bo a r d which is comp r ised of seven members, all appointed by the Mayor of Key West. 11tis Board rhc n reports to the City Manager who in cum reports to the City Commission. The City Commiss ion is compristd of five e lec.tcd mcmbe rs (the mayor and four city commis sioners) S"n ice Area 1l1c Hans it syst e m provide s motorbus services t o the City of Key West and to Stock Island (outside Key Wes t city limits hut in Monroe County). -T11e tran s it system provides fixed-ro ute motorbus in Key West and Stock Isla nd. Monroe County provides demandr esponse servitcs 10 all of Monroe County 278

PAGE 304

TABLE 111-RI Key Wes t Transit Au thorit y Motorbus Performan c e Indicators PERFORMANCE INDI CATORS 1 987 1988 1 989 1990 1 99 1 1992 Serv ice Area Populalion (0 .00) 26. 66 27.80 28.18 28.45 29.23 32.47 21.71 % S e rv i c e Asea Sizb (s q u ara m)es) n/a n/a nla n/a n /a 1 9 0 0 n/a Trips (000 } 260 39 265 30 245 90 238.52 242 .$8 227 59 12.60% Pass e n ger M iles (000) 1 ,103. 54 1 123 62 821.79 822.01 836 0 1 78 4 .34 .92% Miles :. . . 252 8 2 230.36 1 77.84 177.80 1 78.48 175 ,22 30 .69% Reenue Mites (000) 24 9 .50 220 3 1 174.30 174.26 17 5 19 172.17 -30.99% .. Vehkle Hours (000) 17.52 1 8 10 1 3.02 1 2 .99 13 02 1 2 .50 8 .69% Reve n ueHou rs(OOO) 17. 52 1 7.42 1 2.66 1 2.66 12 6 7 12 ,15 -30 .66% Route Miles 26.80 26.80 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 2.99% Op eral ing Expe nse (000 } $663.44 $62 0 .96 $71$.$9 $668 .10 56$8 .09 $671 .51 1.2 2 % Tota l O p e r ating E xpe nse (000 1984 $ ) $600.43 $54 1 .75 $ 598.96 $532 15 S518.47 $4 8 4 .73 -19.27% T otal Maint enance Expens e (000} $2'27.26 $225 13 $199.41 $200 9 1 $215 .90 $ 1 6 1 .70 20.05% Tota l of 1984 $ } $205.69 $198.41 $166.8.4 $ 160.02 $ 162.68 -$131 .16 23% Tolal Cap it al E xpense (000) $395.00 S2 6 7 $0.00 $0.00 5 1 12 61 $0.00 -10 0 00% Total Local $527 .9 5 $604 2 1 $600.69 $541.60 $524 .76 $5 24.94 -0.57% Ope r atin g Reven u e (0 0 0) $193 .66 $191 .5$ $160.06 $151 .14 $ 1 5 4 .60 $153. 91 20. 53% P as senger Far e Revenues (000} $155.39 $ 156.35 $122. 9 5 $ 127.97 5 130.7 4 $110 .77 -28 .72.4 Total EmplOyees 12.00 12.00 1 4 .00 14.00 14 .00 1 3.00 8 37% T ra nsportatio n Operating EmplOyees 8 .00 8 .00 7.40 7.40 7 40 7 .60 00% Mai n te nance Empl oyees 3.25 3.25 5.50 5.50 5 .50 3.90 20.12% Administrative E m ployees 0 .75 0.75 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.50 100.00% Vehides Ava il able f o r Maximum Service 9 .00 9 0 0 9 .00 9.00 9.00 8.00 -11 .11 % VGh idos Operated i n Service 4.00 4 .00 4.00 4 .00 4 .00 4.00 0 .00% Spare Ratio 125.00 % 1 25 .00% 125 00% 125.00% 125 .00% 100 00% n/a 1 o t a l Ga ll ons Co n sumed (000} 790.'75 ________ ______ _________ 5 1 .52__ 48.61 ____ 279

PAGE 305

280 TABLE lll-R2 Key West Transi t Authority Purchased Motorbus Performance Indicators PERFORMANCE IND I CATORS 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Serv i ce A rea Popu l alio n (000) 26 68 27.80 28 .18 29.23 < 32.47 21.71% Serv ice Area S iz e ( s q u a r e mOOs) n ta nla nla nra nla 1 9 00 n /a Passenger Trips (000) ,. 44 .10. 98.28 _. ' 4 6 90 0 .00 0.00 n l a > '' ; >k/' ,,,.._,._, Passen ger ( 000) 20 .16 87.36 85 54 0 00 0 00 0 00 n/a Veh icle Miles (000) 20.16 21.6 7 11. 68 o.oo .o oo 'c o.oo n/ a . '"' R o venve M i!e.s ( 000 } nU1 20.72 1 6 .90 0 .00 0 00 0 .00 n/a Vehicle Hool$( 0 0 0 ) 2 59 2 .51 2.16 0.00 0 00 < 0.00 nla # Reve n u e Hours (000} n/a 2 .51 2 08 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 n/3 R o ute Mil e s 2.20 2 .20 1.30 0.00 0 00 0.00 nla Tot31 Operal i n g E)peMe (000) $20 .65 $32.13 $24 80 SO.OO $0. 00 $0.00 nl a Total Opera l in g Expe nse (000 of 1984 S) $16.45 $25.59 $ 1 9 75 $0.00 v $0.00 $0.06 n/a Total Main t e n ance Expe nso ( 000 } n/a nfa n/a SO.OO $0.00 $0 .00 nl a Tot31 Mainte n ance E xpe nse (000 of 1984 $) nla nfa nfa <-$0 00 $o. O o .' "so.oo '' : nla T otal Capi1a l Expense (000 } nla n/a n/a $0.00 $0.00 $0 .00 total loca.l R evenue (000 } nJa n/a n / a $0. 00 $0.00 *;; $0 .00 n/a Ope rali ng Re'len u e (000) M t n/a n/a $0. 00 $0. 0 0 SO.OO n/a Passeng-e r F are Revenues (000 ) n/a nta nta $0 .00, $0. 00 f'$0.00 nla Total E mp to yees n/a n ta n t a 0 00 0 00 0.00 nla tfan.s portation Operaling Employ4CS n/a n/a n t a 0.00 0 .00 ., -'o oo ,. ,. . . ,. Malnlen a nce E m p loyees tl/3 n l a nla 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 nl a Ad m inistrative Employees n/a nla n/a '<, 0 00 O.oo '.>tt : Q oo Veh i c l es Available tor Maxim u m Service 1 0 0 1.00 1.00 0 00 0 .00 0 .00 nfa '< .' .. Vehicles Ope r ated in Maximu m Service 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 00 0.00 '" 0 .00 n/a ' Spare R atio 0 00% 0 .00% 0 00% n/a nta n/a n/a Total Galloos Coosumed ( 000) n/a ni a )' nta 0.00 :.. 0 00 ... o.oO:: n/a ----------

PAGE 306

P ERFORMA NCE I N D ICAT O R S Servi ce Area Popula t ion ( 000} Service A rea Size ( s quare miles) P a s s en ge r Trips { 000 ) Pas se n g e r Mi:es (000) V e hi c l o Mile s (000) Reve nue Miles ( 000) Vehicl e Hou r s (0 00) Rev en u e Ho u r s (000) R o ute M i les T o t 3 1 Opera ling E x p ense (000) Tot al Operating (000 o f 1 984 $) r ota l Mai n t e n a nce E x p e n se (000 ) T otal M ai n t e na n ce Expense { 0 0 0 of 1 9 8 4 $ } Tot a l C a pital Expense { 000} T otal Loc a l Reve n u e { 000} O p er a t i n g Rcvo n u e (00 0 ) Face Revenues ( 000) Tota l E m ployees Transportati o n Ope rating Employ ee s Ma i n t en a nce Em plOy e es Administr ative E m p l oyee s ' Vehicles Availab l e f o r Maximu m Service Ve hic:les Oper a t e d in Maxi m u m S ervice S p a r e Ratio T ota l Gallon s Consume d ( 0 0 0) -----TABLE IJI-R3 Key West Tr:1nsit A uthorit y Systtm Tota l Perfor m ance Indica t ors 1987 198 8 1 9 8 9 19 9 0 2 6 68 2 7 8 0 28 .18 28 45 nla n/a nla n/a 304. 49 363 58 2 9 2 8 0 238 .52 1 123 .70 1,2 1 0 .98 9 07 .33 822. 0 1 272 98 252 02 1 9 5 .52 177. 8 0 n t a 2 4 1.04 19 1. 2 0 174.26 2 0 .12 2 0 6 1 1 5 18 1 2 .99 nfa 1 9 93 111.74 1 2 .66 29 .00 2 9 00 2 8.90 2 7 .60 $ 6 64 0 9 $653. 10 $74 0 .69 $666 10 $6 1 6 .8 7 $ 5 67.35 $618 7 2 $ 5 3 2 1 5 "'' nta nfa $ 200 9 1 n / a n fa n / a $160.0 2 nl o n f 3 n/a $ 0 00 nla n / a n/a $5 4 1 6 0 nla nla n / a $ 1 5 7 1 4 nlo n i a n/a $127 9 7 nla n /a n/a 111.00 nla n / a n/a 7 .40 nla n t a "'' 5 .50 nlo nla n/a 1 1 0 10 00 1 0. 0 0 1 0 .00 9 0 0 5 00 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 00 100.00% 1 00 00 % 100. 0 0% 1 25.00% nla nta nt a 54 80 1 99 1 1 992 %Chan ge I 1987 i 29 n 3 2.47 2 1 .71% i nla 19. 00 I nla 242 5 8 227 5 9 2 5 2 6 % I 836.0 1 7 8 4 3 4 3 0 20% i 1 7 8. 4 8 175 22 8 1 % 175.19 172. 17 nla 1 3.02 12 .50 37. 66% 1 2 .67 1 2 .15 n/3 27.60 27.60 I $ 668 .09 $671.5 1 1 .84% $51 8.47 S48 4 .73 21.112% $ 215 90 $ 18 1.70 nla $ 162. 6 8 $131. 1 6 n/3 $112 .61 s o o o n/3 $524. 7 6 S5 2 4 9 4 n/3 $ 154. 6 0 S 1 53 9 1 nla $ 1 3 0 .7 4 5 110 .77 n/3 1 4. 0 0 13 0 0 "" 7 A O 7 .60 nla 5 5 0 3 .90 n/3 u o 1. 5 0 " 9 .00 8 00 20 00% i 4 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 0 0 % 1 25 00% 1 0 0 00 % n / a 5 1. 5 7 4 8 6 1 n fa 2 8 1

PAGE 307

E FF ECTIVENES S MEASURE S SERV I C E SUPP L Y Vchiclo Mile:& Per Capita SER V I C E CONS UMPTION Passenger T r ips P e r Capita Panenger Trips Per Revenu e Mile P3ssen ger Trips Per Revenu e Hour QUALITY O F SERVICE Average Speed (R.M.IR H ) Age of F leet {in years) Nu mbet o f I n cidents Ro3dc..Us Reve n u e Miles Between Incid en t s (000) Reve n u e Miles Between R oadcaUs (000) AVAII..ABILITY Revenue Miles Per Rou ; e M ile (000) 2 8 2 TABLE 111-R4 Key West Tran sit Authority Directly-Operated Motorbus Effectiveness Me-asures 1987 1988 1989 1990 9.48 8 .29 6 31 6.2 5 9.76 9.55 8.73 8 .39 1.04 1.20 1.41 1 .37 14.86 15 .23 19.42 18.84 1 4.24 12.65 13 .76 13 .76 5 .44 6 .44 7.44 8 .44 10.00 8.00 8 .00 5.00 48.00 8 .00 5.00 5 .00 24.95 27,54 21.79 ' "' 34.85 5 .20 27.54 34.86 34.85 9 .3 1 8 .22 6 .32 6.31 1991 1992 1987-19 2 6.11 5 .40 . 05% 8 .30 'd>. 7.0 1 -28.18% .,.; -,.: 1.38 1 .32 26.66% .. 19.14 1 8 .73 ,. 26.04% 13 .82 14 1 7 ..0.46% 9.44 10.44 91 91% ri 2 .00. 1 ,00 '< -00.00% 25.00 65.00 35. 42% 87.60 ,,._., 172 .17 ''.' 590. 09% 7 01 2 .65 -49 04% 6.35 6.24 -32 99%

PAGE 308

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE S UPPLY Vehicle Miles Per Capita SERVICE CONSUMPTION Passenger Trips Pe r Capita Passenger Trips Pet Revenue M ile PassengCr Trips Per Revenue Hour QUALITY OF SERVICE Averoge Speed (R.M,/R.H.) Average Age of Flee t (in yeatS ) Number of I ncidents T ol81 RoadcaJis Rev e nue Miles Betwee n tnt;:idents (000) ReveMe Mies Betwee n RoadeaJIS (000) AVAILABILITY Revenue M3es Per Route Mle (000) -T ABLE 111-RS Key \Ves:l Transir Autho rily Purchased M ororbus E.fftcli\'tnt:n Me:.uures 1987 1988 1989 1990 0.76 0.78 0 .63 1 .65 3 54 1.66 nlo 4 ,74 2 78 nla 39.12 22 55 n/a 8 .25 8 1 3 7.00 8 .00 "" nla n / a nla nJa nla n/t nlo nl a nla nla nta nil nla 9 .42 13 .00 ----------------------1991 1992 1987-11 2 nla nla "'' nla ola nl a nla nla nla nl a nla olo nl o nla nlo n/ a nla nlo nit n/a nl a nla nit n/a nla nl# nit n/ a nl a nl a nta nla nJa nJa nta nla nl a nl a nta nta nta nJa nla 283

PAGE 309

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURE S SERVICE SUPPLY Vehicle Mites Per Capita SERVICE CONSUMPTION Paasenger Trips Per Capita Pauenge r Trips Per R e v enue Mire Pauonger T r ips Per R e v enue Hou r QUAliTY OF SERVICE Av111ge Spee
PAGE 310

EFFICIENCY MEAS U R E S COST EFFIC I ENCY Opcuating Expense Cap ita Opera ting Expense P e r Pea k Veh icl e ( 000) Ope r ating Expense Pe r 1rip Operat ing Expe ns.& Per P a ssenger M i l e Operat i n g E xpense Per R e v enue Mite Operati n g Expense Per Revenue Hou r Ma int enance E xpens e P e r Reve n ue Mile Ma in tena.nee Exp. Per Opera t i n g Exp. OPERATI N G RATIOS F a rebox Recovery loca l Re v e n ue Per Ope r a t i n g Expe nse O p e ra:tkl g Revenue Per Operat iflg Expense VEH I C L E UTILIZA TION Vehic l e Miles, P e r Pesk Vehicle {000) V ehicle H o u r s Por P e a k V e hide (000) Re ve n u e Ml6es Per Vehicle Miles Reven u e Mles Per T o ta l Vehicl e s {00 0 ) Revenue Hours P e r T otal Vehi cles, (000) LABOR PROO UCTMTY Reven u e H o urs Per E.mpklyee (000) Passenger Trips Per Em p loyee (000) E N ERG Y UTIL IZATION Veh kl: e M ite s Per Gallon FARE A v era g e Far e ---------TABLE lllR7 Key \Vest Transit Authority Directly -Operated Mororbus Efficiency Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 $24 .87 $ 2 2.34 $25 .4\ $23.49 $ 1 6 5 8 6 $\55.2 4 $1 7 8 9 7 $167.o3 $ 2.5 5 $2. 3 4 $2 .9\ $ 2.80 $0.60 $0.55 $0.87 $0.81 $2.66 $2.82 S4. t1 $3.83 $37.86 $35.65 $ 5 6.53 $ 5 2 .77 S0. 91 $1.02 S1.t4 $1.15 34.26% 36.25% 2 7 .85% 3 0 07% 23 .. 42% 25. 18% 1 7.17% 19.15% 79.58% 9 7.3 0 % 83. 9 1 % 6 1 .07% 29. 19% 31.82% 22 .36% 23.52% 63. 21 5 7 .59 44 .46 44.45 4 .38 4.52 3 2 5 3 .25 O.S9 0 9 6 0.98 0 .98 27.72 24.48 1 9 .37 1 9 .35 1.95 1 .94 1 .41 1.41 1 A 6 1,4 5 0.90 0 ,90 21.7 0 22. 1 1 17.56 17.04 0 .32 2 .89 2 .95 3 .24 $0.60 $0.59 $0.50 S 0 .54 1 991 1992 %Change 1987-1992 $2 3 54 $20.68 .84% s1no2 $167.88 \.22 % $2. 84 $2.95 15. 80% $0. 82 $0. 8 6 4 2 4 1 % $3.93 $3. 9 0 46.67% $54.29 $ 55.2 6 4 5 .96% s 1.23 $1 .06 15. 85% 3 1.38% 2 7 .06% 1. 0 1% 19.00% 1 6 .50% .57% 76. 26 % 78. 17% 1.76% 22.4 7 % 22.92% .48% 4 4 62 43. 81 .69% 3 25 3.1 2 20 .69% 0 .98 0.98 0 4 3 % 19.4 7 2 1.52 2 2 .37% 1 .41 1.52 21.99% 0 .91 0 .93 0 1 % 17.33 17.50 1 9 .34% 3.46 3 .60 1 027 .52% $0.54 $0.49 18.44% 2 8 5

PAGE 311

E FFICIENCY MEAS URES COST EFFICIENC Y Ope ratin g Expense P e r Capita O pe ra ting Expense P e r Pea k V e h lde (000) O p e rating Exp e nse Per P .use ngor Trip Operatin g Expense P e r Pass e n ger Mite Operating Expens e Pe r R eve n ue Mile Opera t i n g Expense P e r Re venue H o u r M aintenance E xpens e P e r Revenve Mile Maintenance Exp. Per Operatmg Ex p O P E RATING RATIOS f'arcbox A:eoovery L.ocal R ev enue P e r Operating Expe nse Ope r ating R e venu e Per OpetaU n g E)(pense VEH ICLE U T .. IZA T I ON Veh icle M i les Per P eak V e hic le (000) Veh i c l e Ho u r s P e r PC'!!:' ''" .. ; _._, ; "'' '" -,( ... ... nla n/a n / a nl a .. nla n / a n /a nla n / a nla < ,.n/a nla n / a nla n/a n/a .. ' . '_.,. ,. ' . nla '>-',,,.,* "nla .. .. .. .. -. nla nla n l a nl a nJa n l a nla n f a nla nla n l a nla ; .. ,. n t a .. ,. ... nla nla n / a .. ,.,, ... --. .. nJa ... -, n/a n l a A nla nla . ., A,-<- nlo n/o nlo ... nla itt a .,., . : nla '"' n/a <

PAGE 312

TABLE JII R9 Key West Transit Authority System Total Efficiency Measures EFFICIENCY MEASURES 1987 1988 198! 1990 1991 1992 COST E FFI CIENCY Operhng Exp.;ns8 ':'i Capila $25 6 4 $23. 50 $26 29 $23.49 $ 23 54 $20 68 -19.35% Operating Expense Per Peak Vel'licte {0 00) $136.82 $ 1 30 .62 $ 148. 14 $167,03 $172.02 S167 .88 22.70% Ope ating Expense Per Pas.seng er Trip $2 25 $1. 80 $2.53 $2 80 S2. 84 SZ.95 31.33% Operating Exp ense Per P assenger M ile $0.61 $0. 54 $0.8 2 $0 .81 $0.82 $0.86 40.63% OP.erati ng Expe ns e R.Gvenue n/a $2.71 $3.87 $3 83 $3 93 S3.90 nla Operating Expe nse Per Revenue Hou r n/a $32.77 $50 24 $52 77 S$4 29 $55 26 nla Expense Per Revenue M il e n /a n/a n /a $1.15 $1.23 $1.06 nla . Maintenance Exp. Per Operating Exp n/a n/a n/a 30 07% 31.38% 27 06% nla OPE RATING RATIOS Fsrebox Recoveryn/a nla n/a 19 15% 19,00% 16,50% nla Local Reven u e Per Expense n/a n/a n/a 8 1. 07% 76.26% 78. 1 7% nla Operating Revenue Per Oporal i ng Expense n/a nla n/a 23 52% 22.47% 22 92% nla VEHICLE UTILIZATION Veh icl e Miles Per Pe3k Veh&:!e (000) 54.60 50.40 39 1 0 4-4.45 44 62 43 .81 Ve h icle Hou rs Per Peak Veh icle (000) 4 .02 4 1 2 3.04 3 .2 5 3 .25 3.1 2 .35% Revenue M iles Pet Vehide M ile s n/a 0.96 0.98 0 9 8 0 9 8 0 .9 8 nra_ ' RcvcnueMilesPerTolsiVeh icles(OOO) n/a 24. 10 1 9. 1 2 19 .36 19.47 2 1 .52 nla Revenue Per Tota l Veh icles (000 ) n/a 1 99 1 .4 7 1.41 1.41 t.52 LABOR PRODUCT I V ITY Revenue Hou rs Pe r Emp loyee ( 000) n/a nla n/a 0.90 0 .91 0 93 nla P assenger Trie s Pe r Emp loyee (000) nta n/3 n/3 1 ?,04 17.33 1 7 .50 n/ a ENERGY U T I LIZATION Vehicle Miles Per Ga ll o n n/a nla n/a 3 24 3.46 3 60 N a FARE Average Far e nta ______ ___________ 1 __ -S0.$4 S0.49 nla 287

PAGE 313

CENERAL Q U E STIONS I. Were any fare changes made during fisca l yea r 1992? If so, please provide l h c previous fare s tructure as well as the updated fare s tructure and indicate whc n the changes were imp lemented. No ch anges were made. 2. W e re the r e nny signi ficant chan ges in ser vice/se r vice area dur ing fis cal year I 992? N one. 3 Have t h e re b e e n any recent changes o r sign ificant events t ha t may help explain the perfom1an ce of the transit system? None. 288

PAGE 314

QUESTIONS AI.IOUT 1992 SECTION 15 DATA I. Since your 1992 Section 15 ret)OJ1 did not includ e a figure for passenger miles, the average uip length from t h e 1990 data (3.45 miles) was used to calc u late a vnlue for this indicator us ing 1 992 pnsscngc r t r ips. This is the same procedure that was used t o calcul ate 1991 passenger m iles. If this procedure is unsatisfac t ory, p l e a se provide an updated figure for 1992 passenger m iles. System Response: KWTA is not required to perfomt an on-board passenger c.ount for furtding purposes. Due t o the lac k of pers onne l the last couJll was performed in 1 989 As sm:h, KWTA indic;.1ted that the vscd to calc ulate t h e 1992 passenge r miles is satisl11ctory. 2. Total operating expense decreased f rom $688,090 in 199 I to $67 I >.S I 0 in 1992, due to a 16 percent decline i n maintenance expe11se from $21.$_,900 in 1991 t o .$1 &1,700 i n 1992. Please explain the s ignificant decrease in maintenance expense. System Response: Most of the bus Oeet was i n need of replacement. As the buses became too expensive to repair they were taken o u t of service instead of being repaired which resulted in th e maintenance cost savings. KWT A replaced their eight 1980 GMC buses in January 1993 with nine El Domdo National Squire vehicles. 3. N<> capital expenses were s hown for I expenditures in 1991 t o w led $1 12,610. What c:.api!i.ll purcha.ses were m::.de i n I 991? I s the 1 992ligurc correct? System Response: I n FY 1991, co1pital expendiwres included t h e purchase of a computer track in g system. There were no major capital expe11diture s duriflg t he 1992 fiscal year. 4. Passenger fitre revenue decreased IS percent from $130,740 in 199 1 to $ 110, 170 in 1992 despite only a six percent decline in p:lsscnger trips (242,580 in I 991; 227,590 in 1 992). This resulted in detrease in average f."re per passenger trip from SO. S 4 in 1991 to $0.49 in 1992. Js t h ere an explanation for this decrease? Syst\."111 Response: Due to mnimena11cc problems, schedules could not l>c kept As a result, full-fare ridl!r ship dccl ir lcd while the reduced-fare riders continued to utilizl.! 1111.! system since most of them do not tide! under time constraints. S. The number bf rnainlcnancc empl oy ees decreased 29 percent from 5 5 FTEs in 1991 to 3 9 FTs in 1992 aJld the number of ad.uin is trative employees increased 36 percent from l.l FTEs in 1991 to 1.5 FTE.s in I 992. Please expla i n t he changes in these employee System Response: According to K WTA, maintenance personnel left and were not replaced since KWTA 's maimenaJlce was to be rurned ov e r to Fleet Services, anolhet depru1ment of the City. The o ld m i nistrative c h ange wa$ due to an adjustment i n the allocation of administrative personnel. 6 The average age of t h e vehicle ncet decreased s l ightly from 9.44 years in 1991 tO 9 .20 years in 1992. I n addition, the number of vehi cles avai fabh:: for maximuu\ serv i ce dropped fr o m n ine to eight vehicles during this time. PJeo.1sc expJain any chang.es t h a t have occurred i n the vehicle ih entory 289

PAGE 315

System Response: K\VTA indicated that the average vehicle fleet age c-alculated f o r FY 1992 was incorrect No major c hanges were made to t he vehicle inventory during t his time except th e removal of one 1980 GMC bus from active service due t o the cost of repairs. As such, the corrected average vehicle fleet age for F Y 1992 is 10.44 years. 7. Tile number of roadcalls increased significantly from 25 in 1991 to 65 in 1992. To what can t his increase be attributed? System Response: This inc reas e can be au ributed to the maintenance problems t h at KWTA has encountered wit h an aging fleet that has needed to be replaced. 290

PAGE 316

K E Y W EST T RAN SIT AUTHOR I TY F i gure IIIR 1 C o unty/Se rvice Area Popu lation {00 0 ) 40 3 0 "1 -I "--'-j I 20 ----! --10 -----. 0 -o---. ' uas uu ,,., nn ,., u9o ' 1 n 2 Figure 111 R3 Veh ide M i l es and Ft.tvtnut M i l e s Perfo r mance Indicators Figure 111-R 4 Tota l O perating Expense 400 300 200 1 00 0 f igure 111 R 2 P .usenger Trips ( 0 00) -1---t--t-1-L -e..-_[, 1 9$4 I,.S 1U6 "" I'U ISU 1990 1"'1 19'U F igure 111-RS P a ss-en ger f.ne R.e v eoues {000} 300 ---S800 -5160 -\ J fT 10 0 r.: .... \.:.: \'llJ r---==r:!..Lj "'011 i 1 U o,.. ..,., ... ..., ,,.,,A... 5600 5400 5 200 so b-1-tl-1-1 -, ___ .. __ --l ------=t:: kul Opo.o V>q (o;.ootM lWO .,r 11 . .... -------. ____ ...... I I S80 I 1 --f-< - .... S40 G 5 ---l I 1101( f...:" .................. l.l .. 'f'll"'""' so ; 4 ; ) o I t :.:F.:. : r:: :: .:.7 1:--:-+ .::::' __ : ,,.. 1taS uu ,,..., ''" ,,., '"' , an , .. Ul4 7 un u u ttto ,,, un '" !US 1tt6 1,.1 UU 1'U lUll l U I lt'U F igure lli R6 Tot3 1 Employees 15, -rr l 1 -,--,------, -, kd-t --1--l-------6 1--l-l1-H--I_j3 ( ,...JII : ) 0 -4 I I I 1=-;=::r=---r.'" 1t$S 1tt6 ltl1 1911 ''*' lt'l lttl F i gure III R7 Vehicles i n Maximum Service 10 t-11 -t:J::tjl_j 4 ... I 2 1---tt--. -,---' o+--1tU 1915 1H6 uu an "" 1no nu nn 291

PAGE 317

292 12 0 9.0 6 0 1--3.0 0.0 KEY WEST TRANSIT AUTHORITY Figure 111-RS Veh i cle Miles Per Capita :...... "\ ..... ]-t I -1 J E:rf ""'J>)oool ""'"'"' "" ) IUt IH\ "-'' 19t1 Uts 1939 "'0 1,1 It'll Figure III R 1 2 Revenulll M iles Between Accidents/Incidents Revenue Miles Between Roadtalls 200,000 40,000 no.ooo 120.000 ( l"':t hi\. -,..., .. ) -v-30.000 20 .000 -./ --80,000 40,000 t [J_ 10,000 0 0 { 1,()1( : ... .. l l tiA IUS 1986 tUJ "" 19., "90 '"' 199Z 19M IUS 1 9 86 In? 1Ut ''" 1990 '"' Utl

PAGE 318

Figur e IIIR13 Operating Expense Per Capi t a $30 0 0 .-. -., ] --:[[] s2o.oo l I I 1--1--1-j= $10.00 1--1---1---; 1 '"' ,,., t98& 1990 1991 "':12 F i gure IIIR16 Maintenanc e Expense Per Revenue Mile $1.50 __ lJ I d 1..... V ... $1.20 50.90 $0.60 I . --. -__ ( tt:ll l : l .. 11--r-+-1 +-F----$0.30 so.oo ,n t9as 1ta' uu "" " 1''o ,,1 un 1 500 1 200 900 Figure III R19 Revenue Hours Per Employee --1 -I I ----. 600 1 1 1 1--!-!--i-1 --j 300 .1-=1. 1:7=> I r tl()l( o --'::J: ..-.. r = l:+ +-::=:1:::::.::: ''*' uas ' 1"1 '"' 1990 '''' 1tn KEY WEST TRANSIT AUTHORITY Erficlenty Measures Figure III R14 Operating Expense Per Passenger Trip $3.00 $2.00 r l J I..,...' $1.00 --1--so.oo ----f-t98t 198S nlll "*' 19U ntt 1990 t')')l 30% 20% Figure IIIR17 Farebox Recove r y Ratio . l I . . I I I I I j_]--l'f)U 191 4 1tlS l"r. 1tU t988 t'J89 IMO 1 991 19':12 zs.ooo 20,000 1S,OOO 10,000 5.000 0 Figu r e IIIR20 Passenger Trips Per Employee ---1--1-l=-1 +1--I ------f-,_, -..... = -_.,. -( .. ... ) r 1 :;=r r=r---l98' 1985 1986 1987 19U \tat 1990 1 991 ls-92 Figure iiiR1S Operating E>tpense Per Revenue Mile ss.oo $.4.00 r TTr 1 ___ $3. 00 1' I -:t. 1 1?.1 S2.o o $ 1 .00 so.oo IS:t4 l 'I$ S 1'Jl4 1911) 1m 1U9 1990 "" 1H2 Figure IIIR 1 8 Vehicle Mile$ Per Peak Vehicle 60,000 .. I I I I I 1--' I_ ; .. 20.000 I t& t 1US 19'U ,81 "U 1 989 19'50 1991 IH2 50.60 ; F igure IIIRl1 Average Fare 1 -1'!-i ;...:] $0,40 1-f--___ I I r r .. so.oo 1 984 I'S 19 U \tU \981 "" 1991 199l 293

PAGE 319

KWTA SUMMARY 294 Total maintenance expen s e decreased 16 percent from $215,900 in 1991 to $181.700 i n 1992. KWTA achieved its cost savi ngs by removing vehicles in need of repair f rom service rather than repairing t he vehic l es since most of K WTA 's bus fleet was in need of replacement and these buses had become too expensive t o repair. These older vehi cles were eventuaHy re.placed in January 1993. Passenger fare rel'enue decreased from $130,740 in 1991 10 $110,770 in 1992, a decline of approximatel y IS percent KWTA allributed this dec l i ne to vehicle maintenance prob l ems, whi ch d isrupte d bus schedules. Due to bus sclledu les no t being kept, filii -fa re r ide rship decl ine d while redueed-fc1.re riders contin ued t o use the system since many of these pe.rsons do not r ide under time constraints. The number of maintenance employees decreased 29 percent from 5.5 FTEs in 1991 to 3 9 FTEs in 1992. According to KWTA, t he d ecline i n th is employee category resu lted from maintenance personnel leaving and not being replaced since KWTA 's maintenance was going to b e turned over to another City Th e number of roadcalls increased 160 percent from 25 road calls in 1991 to 65 roadcaHs in 1992. KWTA believes that this increase can be attributed to the maintenance problems that have been encountered with its aging vehicle fleet.

PAGE 320

S. SPACE COAST AREA TRANSIT (BREVARD COUNTY) S Y STEM I'ROFILE Organizarional Structure Space Coast Area T ransit is a d epanment o f Bre vard County Governing Boc.Jy and Conmosilion llle system is g o verned by t h e n re\ard County Commission which i s compr ised of f our elected commissioners. Sen lee Aren Spac.e Coast provides transit services t o Brevar d County. ModesSpace Coast dire c tly operat es d emand-response services as welt as contracting to prov ide additional d e mand-respon se and vanpoo l services. I n addilion, Space Coast bega n operating fixed-route moto!'bu s services o n Oct ober 1, 1991. 295

PAGE 321

296 TABLEIII-Sl Space Coast Area Transit Demand-Response Service Pcrfonnance Indicators PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 ' ,.; _, ,..... f < "' ' Service Asea P opulation (000) 371 70 387.60 403 .50 398.98 -< w: 417 .7 4 12.39% '( SeNice Alea Size (squ are miles ) n j a n j a nja nja n j a 427.00 n j a Passenge r Trips (000) 392.00 364.45 360 32 385.69 392 68 202.48 .35% Passenge r M ile-s (000} n f a 3 ,724.72 5,109 .31 4,844 27 4 932.06 2,543 09 n j a Veh icle Miles (000} 954.30 984.8 1 1 177.63 1 ,449.09 ., 1.3 47.68 392..45 .88% Revenue Miles ( 000) n f a 892.67 1 ,118.75 1,362 65 1 273.56 3t!i4.11 nja Veh icle Hour s (000) 64.80 71.90 64.24 ; ,_ ,. -.. -67.08% Revenue Hours ( 000) 63.00 69.82 6 1.05 74 .06 69.22 18 .70 .3 1 % Tol& l Operating Expense {000} $ 1 937.42 $2, 098 .24 $2, 1 60.63 $2,638.37 $2,789.42 $ 1 107.13 -42.86% T olal Operating Expense (000 o f 19$4 $} $ 1 ,753.40 $1,830.58 $1,80 7 .73 $2,10 1 .48 $2, 10 1 .82 $799.18 -54.42% T ota l Mai n tonanoo ExpoMc ( 000) $396 20 $462.67 $374.04 $391.94 $54 1 1 9 $207.51 .63% T otal Mai n tenance Expe n se (OOOof 1984 $) $358.57 $403.65 $312 94 $312:.18 $40'7.78 $149 79 T otal Capi tal Expe nse { 000) $ 1 ,670 ,00 $576.21 $673.48 $617.79 $742.69 $1 149.57 -31.16% T otal local Revenue ( 000) $1,161 .83 $1 ,381 .46 $1,678.84 $2,3 1 8.25 $2,068.8;8 $2.217.5 1 90. 86% Opefati n g Revenu e (000) $999.66 $1,18 1.-16 $1,465.5 1 $1,98S.35 $1,691.55 $1 710 .90 71.15% Pas-senger Fare Reven ue s {000) $287.38 $220.09 $269.70 $415.05 " $439.76 "' $12$.!f7 -.55.99 % i T otal Employees 62.80 50.20 57.50 56.25 51.60 2 1 .30 -66 .08 % I T r ansportation Optrati n g E'mployee$ 44.80 41.00 54.50 54.25 46.80 19.00 E mptoyee$ 12. 00 2 20 0 00 0 00 0.00 0.00 n fs. Emp l oyees 6.00 7 .00 3 .00 2 00 4.80 2 30 -61.67 % Veh icles Available tor Max imum Service 43.00 32.00 34.00 39.00 36.00 29.00 -32. 56% . . Veh icles Operated in Maxi mum Service 40.00 23.00 23.00 2S.OO . ... ;>.:' 20 00 \. Spa r e Rati o 7.50% 39 13% 47.83% 56.00% 44.00% 45.00% nfa Tolal F uel Cons u med (000 of gallons) 133.20 113.22 145.05 169.42 $-,"-t 1 82.43 ,"> : <) 64.88 \ , -51.2 9%

PAGE 322

P E RFORMANC E INDICAT ORS Area Pop u lation (000) Servi co Area S ize (s.quatc m ites) Pa$$.eng0r T r ip s (000) . Passenger Miles (000) Vehk: I O MilOS . . Revenue Mne_ s (000) V eh icle Hou rs (000) Reve nue Hours (000) .. Route MilOs . Total Operating Expense (000) . Tot a l c)perallng ( 000 o f.1984 $) T o t al Mai nte n ance Expe n se { 000) iotal Mainlenance Expense { 000 of 1984 S) T o t al Capilal Expense (000) T o tal Local Revenu e (000) Operat ing Rovcnuo {bOO) Passen ger f are Reve n u es (000) T o t al Employee s Tn'lnspo r tat ion Opcmting Employe es Mainte nance Employee s Admin i sltalive Employees Veh icles Available for Maximu m Serv i ce Veh icles Operated in M ax i m u m Service Ralio Total Fue l Consumed (000 of gallons) TABLElll S2 Space Coast Area Trans it Purchased Demand-Response Scnice Performance Indica tors 1987 1 988 1989 1990 371.70 381-60 403 50 398.9 8 nja nja nja .,. 33.40 00.46 82.31 85.96 .,. 800.52 1,008.43 1,139.40 202.30 448.84 664.14 nfa 440. 4 1 426. 40 632.52 8.20 14 .93 40.80 00.38 s.so 7.1 $ 38.76 57.50 n/a n f a I $43.58 $273. 2 6 $437.14 $034.54 $39.44 $238.<0 $355.74 $505.42 nfa n j a n j a nfa nja .,. nja nfa n j a n f a n j a nfa nja n j a nja nja nja nja n j a nfa n j a nja .,. nja n j a n f a nja nja n fa nja nja n j a .,. nja nja n j a nfa nja nja 7 .00 19.00 18.00 20.00 7.00 1 9 .00 1 8 .00 20.00 0.00% 0 .00% 0.00% 0.00% nja .,. nfa n{a 1991 1992 % Cha nK e 198 7 -19 2 <09 .37 4 17.74 12.39% nja 4.27 .oo 0/3 134.08 172.52 416.52% i 1,648.31 3,272.35 nja i 1 .145.00 1 ,689.54 735. 17% 1 ,021.34 1 ,477.44 nfa 76.03 76.57 833.80% 69.75 72. 0 1 1209 3 1 % .,. nfa nja I $669.1 3 $ 1 ,939.37 4349.93% I $054.89 $1, 399 .94 3449.30% nja nja of a nja nja nfa nja nfa oja oja n f a ofa of a n f a nja nja $958.33 n j a oja n f a nja nja nja nja nja of a .,. nja o j a nfa 30.00 33.00 371.43% 26.00 30.00 328.57% 1 5 36% 1 0 .00% nfa .,. nja nfa 29 7

PAGE 323

298 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Sel\iice AIU Popu l ation (000) ScNiee Alea Site miles } P'ss.enger Trip$ (000) Passenger M iles (000) Vehicle Miles ((X)()) Reve n u e Miles (000) Vehicle Hour s (000 } Reven u e Hou r s {000) Route Milos T ot a l Opetaling Expense (000) T otal Ope r at i ng Expense (000 of 1984 $) Total Mai ntenance Expense (000} Tot a l Mainte ru.i-K:e Expense (000 ot 1984 $) T o1a1 Capit a l Exp en$e (000) Tolal Local Revenue {000) Opera t i ng Rov enuEt (OOJ) P assenge r F:ue Reven ues (000) T o1a1 Employees T ra.ns ponation Operating Employees Maintenance Employees Adm i ni$t r ative Employees Vehicles Availab l e for Maximu m Servic e Veh icles Ope rated i n Maximum Stt\liO& Spa r e RatiO Tolal F u e l Consumed (000 of galiOn $ } TABLEIII-S3 Space Coast Area Transit Van pool Perfonnancc I ndicators 1987 1988 1989 1990 I 199 1 1992 %Change 1987-1992 371.70 ,. 139 .30 .,. .. 438.90 n/a 33.00 32.30 n/a $133.90 $ 1 21 .1 8 .,. n f a n/a n f a .,. .,. nfa n/a nfa ., . 33.00 32.00 3.13% 0 .00 387 60 n/a 184.32 6 ,495.09 747. 1 2 747. 1 2 47.63 47 .63 nfa $ 1 67.4 2 $146 06 $9.43 $8.23 n/a n/a .,. nfa I n f a n/a .,. 42 .00 40 .00 5.00>. 0 .00 403.50 nfa 188. 26 8 ; 4 05.34 930.86 884..:32 59.29 56.33 nfa $259.35 $216.9 9 $77.66 -.'$84.98 n/a $267.1 0 $246.00 $248.00 2 .00 0 .00 0 .00 2.00 61.00 58.00 5 17 % 88.43 398.98 I 409.37 117. 74 12.39%' n/a 172.63: 8 9 4 7.78 ,. 955. 1 8 909.69 60.84 !>7. 80 nfa $285.98 $227)8 $89.76 $71.49. n/a $295.82 $295.82 $295.82 2 .00 o .oo 0.00 2 .00 55.00 55.00 0 .00% 90.97 '. ., . 194.49 11,944. 27 427 .00 I n/a : 217.97 21 56.47% 13, 593.56 n/a 1,084.06 ..,_ 1. 45.66 43.38 nfa $328.07 $247.20 n{a .; ri/a n/a $316.07 $31 6.07 $31 6-07 .,. 1 ,4 48 .53 '> 61.03 57.78 n f a $306.98 $221 .00 nfa 84.92% .,. n f a "'"'' ';.", -,, n a ;;;: .. :c .-'Yi 129 .26% 82.86% nfa ,nja $524.07 $294.98 $294.98 $294.98 2 .00 nfa n f a I nfa nfa t .. > 0 .00 0 .00 2.00 nfa nfa nfa ;
PAGE 324

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Secvice /Vea Populatio n (000) Setvice /vea Size (squate m i les) P assenger P as.senger Mile s {000) Vehieto Miles (000) Aeve n ve Miles ( 000) Veh icte Hou t s (000) Ho u rs (000) Route Milos Total Opecating Ell.pense {000) T ota l Operating Expense {000 of 198-4 $) Total Maint e nance E>cpense (000) Total Maintenance Exponso (000 of 198 4 $) Tota l Capllal Expense (000) Total local Reve n u e (000) .' Operating Reven u e (000) Pessef'lger fare Revenues {000) Total Employees Transportat i o n Ope ratin g Employee$ Maintentln ce Employ ees Admlni s ttatiY'e Employees Vehicfes Avai lable for Maximum Service Vehides Ope rat ed i n Maxi mum Serv i ce Spare Ratio T ota l Fuel ConsumOd (000 of ga.llonsL ______ TABLEIIIS4 Space Coas-t Area Transit Directly Operated Motorbus Performance Indicators 1987 198$ 1989 1990 371 70 387.60 40:) .50 398.98 n{a n{a nfa n{a 0 .00 0 .00 o .oo o.oo 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0 .00 o .oo 0.00 o.oo o .oo 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 o.oo o .oo 0.00 0.00 o .oo o .oo o.oo o.oo $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 so.oo $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 so.oo $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 so.oo $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 o .oo 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 n{a n{a of a nfa o.oo o .oo 0.00 ----------------------1991 1992 % 1987-19 2 409.37 417.74 1 2.39% nja 427.00 n/a o .oo 123 .21 n{a o .oo 1,547 53 nta 0.00 456. 43 n{a 0 .00 400.21 n{a o .oo 15.22 n{a 0 00 14 .30 n{a 0 00 452.00 n{a $0.00 S9t6.04 n{a $0.00 $661.24 n{a $0.00 5241 35 n{a $0.00 $174.22 n{a so.oo n{a nta $0.00 nja n{a $0.00 nja nfa $0.00 nt nta 0.00 ts.ao n{a 0 .00 13 50 n{a o .oo o .oo n{a 0.00 2 30 nfa 0.00 29.00 n f a 0.00 11.00 nfa nja 163. 64% nfa 0.00 75.47 o f a 299

PAGE 325

PERFOR M A NCE I ND I CATORS SoNice Atea Populalion (COO) ScNiee Asea. Si:zo (square miles) PasM::nger Trips {000) Passenger M lles (000) VOh i C I O (000) Aeve nue Miles (000) Vehi c l e Hour s (000) Revenue Hours (000) Rou!e M ilu Tota l Operating Expense ( 000} T ota l Expense (000 of 1 964 $ ) T o t a l Maintenan ce Expense (000) Total MaintManco Expenso (000 of 1 984 $) Capi1 al Expense (000) Total Local Reven ue {000} Opcr.,ling Revenue (000} P assenger Far e Revenue s (000) Total Emp loyees rraMpon:ttfon Opcratir.o Employees M.aln1enance Employt!es Admin istra1i\a Employees Veh i c les Availabl e for Maximum Sci'Viec Veh icles Operated i n Maximum Setvice Spare Rati o T otal Fuel Consumed (000 of ga llOns) 300 TABLEffi-SS Spa c e Coast Area Transit Systen1 Total Perronnance Indicators 1987 198 8 1989 1990 371.70 387.60 403.50 398.98 n fa nfa n fa n fa 564.70 609.23 630.89 644 .28 . nfa 1 1 070.33 14,523 .09 14,93 1.45 1,595 .50 2,181.48 2,$51 .34 3 .068. 41 I 2.080.20 2 429.47 2 .904.86 1()6.00 134.46 164.33 199.97 100.80 124 .59 156.14 189. 3 6 nl n/a I I $2,114.90 $2, 538.91 $2, 857 12 S3 5 5a.89 $1,91 4 .03 $2,2 1 5.05 $2, 390.46 $2.834 .68 nfa nla .,. nfa nfa nfa nfa nfa n fa nl n fa n fa n/a n/a .,. nfa nfa nla nfa nfa n fa nla .,. nfa I n/a n f a nta nja n/3 nfa nfa n fa nl nf a nfa n/a nfa nfa nfa 8 3 .00 93.00 113.00 114.00 .. .. -. 79.00 82.00 99.00 1oo.oo 5 .06 ... 1 3 .41% 14.1 4% 14.00% .,. nfa .,. nia 1991 1992 % 1981-19 2 -. 409.37 417.74 1 2.39% n f a 4 27.00 nfa :. 721.25 716. 1 7 . 26.82% .. 1 8 524.63 20 956.53 nla 3 631.40 4.060 .39 154.49% 3,378.96 3 670.30 I 194 .93 174 1 5 64.2$% .... 1 82 34 1 62.80 6 1.50% I .,. .,. $3, 986 .62 $4 269 52 $3,003. 9 1 ' .. nla .,. .,. .,. I nja .. nfa n fa n fa .,. . n/a ., .,. nfa n fa n fa $ 1,379.78 .,. nfa I nfa .,. nfa nfa n f a n fa nfa .. nf a nfa n fa 1 34 .00 137.00 65.06% .. -
PAGE 326

TABLElU-S6 Space Coasl Area Transil Directly -Operated Demand-Response Service Effectiveness M ensurcs EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 S ERVIC E SUPPLY Vehicl e Mi.tes Per Capita 2 .51 2 .54 2.92 3 .63 3 .29 SERVICE CONSUMPTION Passenger T r ips Per Caplla 1.05 0 .94 0 .8 9 0 .97 0.96 ' . Passenger Trips Per Revenue M ile I 0.41 0 .32 0.28 0.31 Pas.senger Trips Per Revenue Ho u r 6-22 5.22 5 .90 5 .2 1 5 67 QUALITY O F SERVICE Averag e Spetd (R.M-iR. H ) I 1 2.79 1 8 .32 18.40 1 8 .40 Average Age ol Fleet years) 5 0 1 4 .22 5.42 5.19 4 ,64 Numbe r of Inci de nts 40.00 46.00 28.00 44.00 52.00 To ta l 197.00 1 12. 00 111.00 107.00 84.00 P.evenue Miles Incidents (000} n{a 19.4 1 39.96 30.97 24.49 Revenue Mites Between Roadoalts (000) n{a 7.9 7 10.08 12.74 15 1 6 AVAILABILITY P.evenu e Miles Per Route Mile (000) n{a n{a n{a n { a n { a 1992 %Change 1987 0 .94 0.48 5<. 04lE. 0.59 n{a 1 0 .83 74 .00% 18 .40 n{a 4 79 4.39% 8.00 80. 00% 26.00 80% 43.01 I 13.24 I n{a I 30 1

PAGE 327

EFFE C TIV E N E SS MEASU R E S S ERVICE SUPPLY Vehi c l e M i les Per Cap i ta SERVICE CONSUMPTI ON Passenger Trips Per capila Pas.senger T rips Per Revenue Mile Passenger Trips P er Revenu e Hou r Q UALITY OF SE RVICE Average SpaG ..,;, ". . . 0.12 .,. 2.40 -60.55 ... '20 .. 52 .,. '. . 1.74 nfa < -.. I ... . I I I .. nfa 'nfa I nJ < nja ' /. n/a

PAGE 328

TABLElll-S8 Space Coast Area Tr.Jnsit Van pool ro;rrecti.,tness Measures EFFECTIVEN ESS M EASURES 1987 1 9 88 19 8 9 1990 199 1 1992 SERVICE S UPPL Y Vehicle Miles Per Capita U6 1.93 2..31 2.39 2 7 8 3 64 208 .SS
PAGE 329

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SE RVICE SUPPLY Vthide M iles Per C4pita SERVICE CONSUMPTION PAS$Cnger Trips Por C3pita Passenger Trips Per Revenu e Mil e P auenger Tr ip$ Per Reven ue Hout QUALITY OF SERVICE Avor ago Speed (R.M./R.H. ) Averag e Age ot Aeet (in yeats) Number of Incidents Total Ro3dcans Revenue M ilu Betwee n Incidents ( 000 ) Revenue M iles Between Roadc311$ {000) AVAILA61LIN Revenue Mile-s Per Route Mile (000) 304 TABLEIIl..S9 Spate Coast Ar
PAGE 330

EFFECTIVENESS M EASURES S ERVICE SUPPlY Ve h i cle Miles P er Capita SERVICE CONSUMPTION Passeng e r Trips Per Capita Pass.eng e r Trip s P e r Reven ue Mil e . Pass.engct T rip$ Per Revenue Hour QUALIT Y O F S ERVICE Average Speed (R.M /R.H.) A ve r age Ag:e o f F l ee t ftn yea r s } Number of inciden ts T ot al Road'ealls Revenue Miles, Betwee n tncldents {000) As'Ye n ue Mile s Betwoen Roadcall s (COO) AVAILAOIUlY Revenue Miles Per Rout e M il e ( 000) TABLEHI-SIO Spac e Coast Area Tra nsit Syst e m To t a l Effl-ctivcness Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 4.29 5 .63 6.34 7 .6 9 1.52 1.57 1.56 1.61 nja 0.29 0 .26 0 .22 5,60 4 ,89 4.04 3 .40 nfa 1 6.70 15.56 15 .34 nfa n{a n{ a nfa nfa n{a .,. .,. nfa nja nfa nfa nfa I .,. nja nfa nja nja n j a n f a n j a .,. .,. 1991 1992 % 198 7-19 2 8 .87 9.72 1 26.4 4 % 1.'76 1.71 12.9 5% 0 .21 0 .20 n f a 3 .98 4 40 18.53 22. 5 5 nfa .,. n{a n{a .,. .,. nja .,. nja nja nja .,. .,. n{a nja nja n{ a nfa 305

PAGE 331

306 TABLE!ll.Sll Space Coast Area Transit Directly-Operated Demand -Response Service Efriclcncy Measures EFF I CIENCY MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 COST EFFICI ENCY Ope rat ing Expense Per Capita '$6.21 $5. 41 $6.35 $6.6 1 $6. 81 < Operating Exp41nse P er Peak Vehi c l e (000) $48.44 $91.23 $93.94 $105.53 $111.56 .. ,_, . Operating Expen.se Per Pas$enger Trip $4.94 $5.76 .. ss.oo : $6 .84 $7.10 Operating Pet Passenger Mile nfa $0.56 $0.42 $0.54 $0.57 Operating Expense Per Reve n ue . n f a .. $2. 3 5 $1.93 $1.94 $2.19: . ... ' ( Operating Expense Ptu Revenue Hour $30.75 $30 .05 $35 .3 9 $35.63 $40.30 . M<\intonne. Expense Per Revenue Mile nfa $0.52 $0,33 $0.29 $0.42 Maintena nce Exp Per Operatin g Exp. 20.4S% 22. 05% 17.31% 14.86% OPERATING RATIOS F'atebox Rteove.y 10.49% 12.48% 1 5.73% < 1$.77% . Lccal Revenue Per ()pera l lng Expense 59.97% 65. 84% n.70% 87.87% 74.17% l < 15 .25%. .... Operat ing Revenue Per Operat ing Ex.pcnse 51.60% "56. 31% 67.83% $. 60 64% VEHICLE U T IUZAr iON Vehicle Miln Per P eak Vehjcle {000} 23.86 42.82 51.20 57.96 53. 91 Vehicle Hours Per Peak Veh i cle {000) 1.62 3 .13 2.79 3 1 5 2.93 Revenue M i les Per Vehiefe Miles nfa 0.91 0.95 0 9 4 . 0.95 Rev enue Miles Per Total Vehicles (000) n f a 27.90 32.90 34.94 35.38 Reven u e Hours Per Tota l Ve hides (CXXl) 1.4'7 2 .18 1 .80 1.90 1.92 LABOR P RODUCTI V ITY Revel'\ue Hours Per Employee (000) 1.00 1.39 1 .06 1 .32 1 .34 .. Passenger Trips Pet Employee {000) 6 24 7.26 6 .27 6 .88 7.61 ENERGY UTILIZATION .. Vehfele Miles Per Gallon 7.16 8.70 8.12 8 .55 ; .. FARE Average Far e $0.73 $0.60 $0.75 $1.08 $1.12 1992 %Chango 1&87 1992 ''"'""' ' $2:65 -49.1 $'lf. $55 .36 14.29% -w--. ,. _, _,, 47 < 10.63" :;::,.;_<, -', ., F' v-, $0. 4 4 .,. .. $3.22'. f)/3 -11'. t )' ' $59.20 92. 5()% .. $0.60 n/a 8.35 .. .,-' 1 1.4 2% 22. 99% 200.29% 234 .00 .. 53% "" ...,,.. ' '!. ,; 199.50% : . ;: ...... 19.62 ; -17 .75%. 1.07 .17% 0 .88 nfa 11 .87 nfa . . . > 0.64 .., . , o .aa i2.48 .. 9 5 1 52. 29% .. <;. \ 6 .05 5.57"' ... $0.62' 4.80')>

PAGE 332

EFFI C IE NCY MEAS URES COST EFFICIENCY ' Operating E.>tpeose Per Capita OperJting Expense P e r Pea k Vehicle (000) Operating Per Passenger rri p Operating Per. Mile .. .. Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile Opcfating Elcpense P e r Revenue Hou r Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile Maintenance Exp. Per Operating Exp. OPERATING RATIOS Farcbox Reeovery local Revenue Pe r Operatin g Expense Operaling Revenuo Per ()peurchased Demand-Response Service Erficiency Measures 198 7 1999 1999 1990 $0.12 $0.7 1 $1 .08 $1.59 $6.23 $14.39 $24 29 $31.73 $1.30 $4.5 2 $5. 3 1 $7,38 n{a $0.32 $0.56 n{a $0.62 $1 .03 $1.00 $7. 9 2 $38.22 $ 1 1.28 $11.04 n { a n{a I nja .,. n{a nja n j a nja nja n{a nja nja .,. n{a n j a n j a nja n{a 28 .90 23.66 24 .94 33.21 1.17 0 .79 2 27 3.()2 .,. 0 .98 0.95 0 .95 nfa 23. 1 8 23.69 3 1 .63 0 .79 0.38 2 .15 2 .89 nja nja I nja nfa n j a n j a n{ a n j a nja n j a n/a nja nja nja nja 19 9 1 1992 %Ch a n ge 19 87 $2.\2 $4.6 4 3SS9.50% $ 33.43 $64 .65 938.3a $6.48 $11. 24 7 61.52 % $0. 53 $0. 59 nja $0. 8 5 $1.3 1 I $12.46 $26.93 239 8 7 % nja n{a n{a .,. n {a n{a nja 49.41 % n j a nja n j a nja n j a nja nja 4 4 .04 56.32 94 .87% 2 92 2.55 117 ,89% 0 .89 0 8 7 nja 34 .04 44.77 n f a : 2 3 2 :2.18 1 71.7 3 % ! nfa nja .,. n j a .,. n {a n j a nja n { a nja $5. 5 5 nja 307

PAGE 333

EFFIC IENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Operating Expense Per Capita Ope r at i n g Ex pe nse P e r P eak V eh icl e (000) O pe rating Expe nse Per Passenger Tfi p Expen$.0 Pet Pas.sen9er Milo Operat ing Expense Per Revenue Mile Oper a t ing Expe nse Per Rovcnu e Hour Maintenance Expense Per Reven ue Mile Maintenance Exp. Per Operaling Exp. OPERATING RATIOS Far ebox Recovery local Revenue Per Ope r ating Expe nse Operating Reve n u e Pet Operating Expense V EHICI.E UTi liZAT I ON Veh i cle Mi les Per Peak Vehicle (000} Vehicle Hour s Pef Peak Veh i cle ( 000) Miles Per Vehicle M i les Mi les P er Tota l Veh icles (000 } Ho u rs Per To!al Vehi cles {000) LABOR P R O D U CTIVITY Reven ue Hour s Per Emp loye-e (000) P assenger lfips P e r E mployee ( 000 } E NERGY UTILIZA T I ON Vehielo Miles Per Gal/00 F ARf Avt t age Fatf! 308 1987 $0.3$ $4.1 8 $0.96 n t a n{a $4.15 n{a n / a I n/a n/a 1 3 .72 1.03 n;a I 0.98 I I nfa I TADLEIU-513 Space C o ast Area Trans it Vanpool Efficiency Measures 1988 1989 $0.43 $0.64 $4. 1 9 $4..47 $0 91 $1.38 $0.03 $0.03 $0.22 $0.29 $3.52 $4.60 $0.01 $0.09 5.6-4% n;a 95.62% nta 102.99% I 95.62% 18.68 16.05 1 19 1 .02 t.OO 0 .95 1 7 .79 14.50 1,13 0.92 nfa 28.16 I 94. 13 I 10.53 nla $ 1 .32 1990 1991 1992 %Ch-ange 1987 $0.72 $0.80 $0.73 103.99 % $5.20 $7.40 $4.58 9 50% .. . . v $1.66 $1.69 "' r $1.41 46.52% $0.03 $0.03 $0.02 n{a $0. 3 1 $0.30 $0. 21 I $ 4.95 $7.56 $5. 3 1 28. 16'1<. $0.10 I I I 31.39% n;a n;a n/a .. 1 03.44% 96.34% 96. 09% nla 103.44% 96.34% 96.09% I -103.44% 96.34%' : .... 96.00.. .. "nfa 17.3 7 25.88 2?.12 65. 62% 1 .11 1.04 0 .91 11.68% 0.95 0 .95 0.95 n{a 16.54 15 .94 19 3 1 n fa ' ., ' r, 0 64 : '::':: '>0 .77; 1 .29% 2$.90 I 28.89 I 86.31 nla 108.98 I 10.50 I nla n{a $ 1 7 1 .. $1 .63 '.,' ",.' . nla

PAGE 334

EFFICIENCY MEASURES COST EFFICIENCY Operatin g Expense Pet Capita Operating Expens-e Per P eak: Vehicle (000) Oparating Expense Passenger Tri p Operating Expense Per Passenger Milo Operating ExponsC Per ?Avenue Mile Operating Expense Pet Aevenv e Hour Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile Mai ntenance Exp P er Operating Exp. OPERATING RATIOS Farebox. Recovery local Revenue Per Opc:uatin g Expense Opetaling nevenue Per Operating Exp e nse VEHICLE UTILIZA TION Ve hicle Miles P er Pea k Vehicle {000) Vehicle Hours P e r P ea k Vehicl e (000 } Revenue M iles Per Vehie!e Miles Revenue M i les Per T ola l Vehjcles (000 ) Reve-nue Hour s P er Total Vehiclos {COO) LABOR PRODUCTIVI T Y P.evenue Hours Pet Employee (COO) Passeng e r Trips Per Employee ( 000 ) ENERGY UTIUZATION Vehicl e Mites Per Gallon FARE Avnslt Directly-Operated Motorbus Efficiency Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 n { a n{a nfa n / a n l a I nla nfa n{a I n f a n{a nla I n{a n { a I n{a nla nfa nla I n l a n{a I .,. n { a .,. I I nfa I .,. I n la I n f a I nfa I .,. I nla I n f a I nla I n f a I n f a I nfa I n l a n j a nfa I I nfa nfa I nla I n{a n { a nla nfa n f a I nla n f a nja n l a n la n{ a nfa n l a n{a 1991 1992 %Change 1987 n / a $2.1 9 n{a I $83 .28 nla I $7.43 I n{ a $0.59 I n{a $2.29 nla I $64.06 n1a nf a $0.6 0 I I 26 .35% nla I I nfa nfa .,. I nfa n f a I n { a 41.49 .,. n la 1 .38 nla n/a 0 88 I nla 1 3 8 0 I n{a 0 .49 I nla 0.91 nl n la 7 .80 n la nla 6.05 n{a n{ a nla nfa 309

PAGE 335

310 EFFI C I ENCY MEASUR ES COST EFFICIENCY Operating Expense Per Capita Operating Ell.pense Pe-t Pea k V e hicle (000) O perating Expens. e Per Passenger Trip Operating Expense Per Passenger Mil e Operating Expense Per Revenue Mife 01)(!:rating Expense Per Revenue Hou r Maint enance Expense Per Revenue Mile Maintenance Exp. Per Operating Exp OPERATING RATIOS Farebox Recovery local Revenue Per Operating Expense Opculting Awenue Per Operating EJ 2 .05 0 .93 25.22 1.38 n{a n/a n { a .,.,' 3 1 .72 '" 1.36 0.90 26.79 \ .19 : .,. I "'' ". '-'' <' nja I '1 .. n/a .. : .. $1. 93 .-,:--. 1 .40% nfa n fa n/a nfa n/a n/a

PAGE 336

GENERAL QUESTIONS I. Were an)' fare changes made d ur ing fiscal year 1992? lf so, p lease provide the previous fare structu r e a s well as the updated fare structure and ind icate when the cluUl,ges were implemented. No changes were made. 2. Wer e there any significan t changes i n serv ice/servic e area during fiscal year 1992? None 3 Have t here been any recent changes o r significant events thai may help explain the performance of the transit sys1em? None. J II

PAGE 337

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTION IS DATA Demand Respo n se Questions NOTE: Since SPCT bega n using its vehicles for b oth fixedroute and demand response servi ce on October I, 1991, and did no t prov ide sepa rat e expense o r revenue data for these two modes, it is diffic u lt to formulate questions concerning 1992 Se-<:tion 1 5 data for eac h individual mode. TIH.:ref o r e the 1992 data for t h e two modes have been combined for the purpose of these quest ions to facilit ate comparison to the 1991 direct l y operated demand response data. I. P lc(lsc describe the fixed-route mot orbus servicet ha t was added in October 1991. Did thi s new service replace a portion of current SPCT demand response servi ce, o r was it intende d an additional mode to augment overall service? System Response: According to SPCT, the fixed-route service replaced the Diai-A-Ous service; therefore, some of the directly-operat ed demand response service was replaced. 2 As i n d icat ed in t he tabl e below, both r ide r ship nnd the amount of service provided have declined sig n ificantly between 1991 and 1992 despit e t h e addition of fixed-route motorbus service Is there a n e:.:pl anation for t hese changes? Oirectly.Optuatod Demand Response and Motorbus FY 1991 FY 1992 Passenger Trip s 392.680 325.690 Passe n ger M iles 41, 9 3 2 060 4 090,620 Reven u e M ile s 1 ,273 560 744,320 Reven u e Hours 69.220 33,000 System Response: f n addition t o some demand response service being contracted t o a private p r ovider, SPCT a l so discontinued t h e Melbourne Airpon Shuttle service. 3 Total operati n g expense decreased from $2,789.420 in 199! to $2.023, 170 in 1992. A p o nion of this decrease was due t o a 1 7 pe rcent decline in maintenance expense from $54 J I 90 i n 1991 to $448>850 in 1992. Are these declines sole ly attribu t able t o the decrease in service indicated in the table above? Please explain. System Response: A large ponion o f 1he decrease i n expenses was caused b}' I he discontinuation of the Melbourne Airport Shutt l e service. 4. P lease explain the increase in capita l expense from $742 690 in 1991 to $1,149,570 in 1992. What capi1al purchases were made in 1 992? 312 System Re.sponsc: Major capital purchases for FY 1992 included three buses, 25 Yans, a n d t he final portion of the c o nstruction of spcrs new transit fac ility> among many smaller purchases.

PAGE 338

5. Passenger fare re.,e n ue decreased 7 1 p.ercent from $439 76 0 i n 1991 tO $126,4 70 in 1992 despite only'' 1 7 percent decline i n passenger trips (as shown in t he above). Th i s resulted i n a s ignificant d ecrease in average fare per passenge r lrip from $1.1 2 i n 1991 t o $0.39 i n 1 992. Is the.r e an exp la.ni'lliOn for t h i s d e crease'! System Response: lbe disc ontinuation of the Melbourne Airpon Shuule service accoulled for the decli ne in fares. 6 revenue i n cr=ed from $2, 068,880 in 1991 tO $2,217 ,510 i n 1992, due 10 a sl i g h l increase in op<:raling revenue ($1,69 1,55 0 i n 1991; $ J ,710,900 i n 1992). Both of t h ese increase-s occu rre d despi t e the significant d e cli ne in passenger fate revenue discussed previ ously. P lease e xpl ain th e incr<:ases i n total loca l revenue and operating revenue. System Response: Most of the in tot a l local revenue c a n be attributed to the local m a t c h for the Tnmspor1ation Disadvantaged (TO ) p rog r am. Brevar d Coun t y current l y matches the TD Grant at more than 25 per<:cnt. (No exp l anation was identified for t h e increas e in operating revenue.) 7. T ota l empl oyees declined 2 6 percent fro m 5 L 6 FTC s in 1991 to 38.0 FTEs in 1 992 primari l y due too 31 pe rcent decline in the number of t r a n sportatiOJl operating employees during t h i s time (46. 8 FTEs i n 199 1 ; 32. 5 FTEs in 1992). Please explain the chnnges in t hese employee catego ries. System Response : n c i n the number of transpo11at i OJl O J ) c tating. employee-s was c :tuscd by the discont of the Mclbvurnc A iqwn Shutt l e s c rvic c 8 The number o f veh icle s a v a i l a b le for maximum service de cr e ased from 36 in 199 I to 29 in 1992 dc sp h e t he vehicles now being used f o r b o th fixed-route and demand respo nse s e r v i c e W h a t changes have beell made to the vehicle Oect? S y s tem Response : 1l1e Airpo11 Shuttl e vans were re m oved from service. 9. T otal fuel COI\Sumed d ec r eased 20 percent fro m 182,430 gallons ira 199 1 t o 145,710 gallo11S in 1992. I s this de crease i n fuel consumpt ion solely to 1 he decline i11 service'? S) 'Stem Response: The decreas e i n f uel consumption can be attributed t o the decl ine in service, specitically t h e disconti numion of t h e Airport Shuttl e s e rvu.::e. I 0. The numbe r o f inc i de nt s decreased from 52 in 1991 tO 25 i n 1992. G i v e n t h e unpredictabilit y or t hese events, ar e there any poss ible reasora s f or t h i s decline? System Response: SPCT aur i butes a large portio n of1he decline in the number of inc idem s to the disconti n u ation of the Airport Shuttl e servi ce (NOTE: SPCT provi ded < m updated ligure of 15 for FY 1992 incid ents f or thes e two modes.) t l. The number of roa dcalls decreased approximalely 33 percenl f rom 8 4 in 199l to 56 i n 1992. To wha t c an I his improvement i n r eliabilit y be a uribuled ? System SPCT a l s o attributes the in t h e mmbcr of rolldt:ll l s primarily to the disconti mmtion of the Airport Shu t t le s e r vice. 3 1 3

PAGE 339

Purchased Ocmand Response Questions I. From t h e d a t a in t he tab le b elow it is evident t hat ride r s hip and the amount of service provided h a ve increased significan tly b etween 199 J and 1992. Is the increase in purchased demand response service the reason f o r t he declines in d i rec tly-operated demand re sponse/mo to rbus service? Please explain these c h anges. Purchased Demand ResPQnse FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change Passenge r Trips 134 ,080 172.$20 26. 7% PaS&engtr M iles 1,648. 3 1 0 3,272 .350 9 8.5% Reven u e M iles 1,021,340 1 ,477 ,440 44,7% Reven u e Hour$ 69,750 72,010 3.2% Veh s. Ava il. for Mu. Service 30 33 10 .0% Vehs. Opec. in Max. SeNice 26 30 15.4% -System Response: The increase in the amount of p ur chased demand r e s p onsc service res ulted from SPCf contrac ting o ut a ponion of it s directfy.operated deman d response service to a pr ivate contra ctor (n a d ditio n SPC' r attribu te s t he ridership growt h on t h is mode t o two p r imary factor s: the use of purchased demand r esponse s ervice by p a trons who previous l y used the Dial-A-Bu s s e rvi ce and the continued g r ow t h of Medicaid tran sportation. 2 From 1991 to 1 992, pas senger m i les increased at a greate r r at e t han did passenge r trips ( see prev i ous rable). l11is resulted in a significant increase in average t r i p length from 1 2 .29 m i les i n 1991 to i 8.97 miles in 1992. Please explain t h i s i ncrease in trip l eng th. System Response: As more Medicaid trip$ a r c pro"ided, 1hc ave ragetrip length increases. T11is is because trips d o not h a v e a n y service area rcslr ictjons. 3. 'lh e d ata in the previous table also indic at e cha t revenue miles ir1 crcas e d a t a greater r a te than did revenue hours resulting in a significan t increase in average speed (revenue miles per r evenue hour) from 14.6 mph in 1991 to 20 5 mph i n 1992. Please ex p lain thi s increase i n speed. System Response : No exp l anation coul d be i d e ntifie d for t he i nc rease in avera g e speed. 4. Total operating expense inc-reased sign ificantly from $869,130 i n 1991 to $1,936 370 in 1992. Is t h is incre-ase solely an ribut a b le t o the increase in ser vice d iscussed p revi ous l y? P l ease explain. 314 System Response : According t o SPCT, the increase in ope r a ting cost can be sole l y a ttri b uted to t he increase in service since the con tracto r is reimbursed on a mileage rate. 1l1erefore as 1hc number of passengers carried and miles d riven incr ease, so does t he amount of money receive d by the c ontrac tor

PAGE 340

Purch:tscd Vanpool Questions I. As indicated in the tabl e below. r i dership and the amount of pur chase d vanpool serv i ce provided have both increased si g n ifitimll y f rom 199 1 t o 1992. Please explain the increases in this serv i ce. Pu r chased Vanpoot FY 1991 FY 1 992 %Change Passenge r Trips 194.490 217,9 7 0 1 2 .1% Passenger M ile s 11,944,270 1 3,593 ,560 1 3 8% Revenue Miles 1.034 060 1 448,530 33. 6% Revenue Hou r s 43,380 57,780 33. 2% Ve h s Ava il. fo r Max. Service 68 7 5 10 3% Vehs. Oper. ilt Max. Serv i ce 67 52. 3% ------------------System Response: Additiona l vans were placed into serv ice. Also, some of the va1lS that had previously been leased to agencies art now being leased to commu te-r g r o ups. According to SPCT, t h ese commuter vans tC1ld t o opcnue mor e service ( i e., a ctumul;uc mor e m iles) thatl do d1c 011::.tncy \'m1:; 2 De-spite the increase in service indicated in the previous t a b l e tota l ope r ating expense dec reased s i x pereem f rom $328,070 in 1991 to $306,980 i n 1992. Is there an explanatio n for t his decline? System Respons e: SPCT indicated t h at the monthly rate for vans leased by commuter groups i s lower than that c harged for vans leased by agencies., thereb y allo w ing the commut e r groups to charge l ower fares for vanpool service. The convers ion of several vans from agency leas e s t o commu ter group leas e s therefore re sulted i n a decrease in total vanpool fare revenue S ince total operati n g exp e nse for t his mode is comprised o f contract expenditu res by SPCT and th e r e venues rewincd by t h e service c o ntracto r t h e decrease in fhre revenue resuhed in an equivalent decline in opernting expense despite t he increase i1l service. 3. Passenger far e revenue decreased approximtltel y seven percen t from $316,070 i n 1991 to S294,980 in 1992 des pite the 12 percent inc r e ase in passeng e r trips discu ssed p r e "iou sly. Tilis decli n e resulted in a decrease in average far e per passe1 lger trip from $1.63 i n 1991 10 SJ.3S i n 1 992. Pleas e explai n System Response: As d iscussed in the previous q uestio n the de cl ine in passenger fhre revenue can be attributed t o 1he co nver:;ion o f sever al vans f rom ag ency leases to commuter g roup leases since the commuter groups charge lower fares thun do the age n c ies. 315

PAGE 341

3 1 6 s.ooo 4,000 l.OOO 2.000 1.000 0 SPACE COAST A R E A TRAN SIT Figure lU--St county/S trvi0:1<11" 11 so ssoo s-$300 $200 SIOO so F igure IIJSS Pusenger hre Revenues (ODD) ,.. 1 / J -'/ v l -"01(: ,,.. "" ,. 1911 ,,.. ,,., \990 ,,, ,,l ttu ltU IH. 1917 IHI 1U9 1990 1t9l 19U UU IUS 1tl6 1H1 1988 UU 1990 1 991 19U 80 o 40 20 0 Figu r e 111 Total Employees fj;RJJ II. ,.. ,....I .... 1 \ \ ....... ) ...... ...,. ua.c uas '"' "" tnt '"' ,,. '"' ltU Fig u re 1117 Vehicl es In M alCimum Service ISO -( "'" IQ&t wflo.4o!o fOtl .,..11/Jo, ) _/ 1..- -, 120 90 -,' .,..__, ........._ .. 30 0 ""' ,,..s "" ,,., ,..., ,., ,,. '"' un

PAGE 342

SPACE COAST AREA TRANSIT 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 o.o F igure 111-SS vehicle Mil es Per Capita 1-' i v DJ= t -== ,,.. ttn "" ''n " "" ''" ttn Effectiveness Mc3surcs Figure III S10 F igure IIIS9 Passenger Trips Per R ev enue Mile o.6 I +---0.4 0 2 --_j ( w L .. 0.0 Average Age of F leet {years) Figure 111 'Tl :::n n-T T 1 4.0 1 -+-1--l 2.0 1 i ;:1. + 1 1 -t.-ol! Ot ..... o o .. ... t 'Jl$ '"' ,,., ,, .. '"' 1990 ,,. \YJl Figure III S 1 2 Revenue Mile s Between Accide nts / I ncidents Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls 50, 000-.--r 4o.ooo +--1-A 3o,ooo+"-+l I i-+ 2o.ooof--f-l 10 .000 !<()If lr
PAGE 343

3 1 8 Figure 11113 Operating Expense Per Capi1a su.oo J -i ;:::::!-" r S9.00 S6 00 (-:::1 I --:;,-SJ.OO so.oo , ,,. uss ,,., ttt7 ''" ,,., tflO "" ''n Figure 111 S 1 6 Maintenance b:pense Per Revenue Mile so.so[ $0 .60 -$0 20 J l -\.. 1--I v --,.OlE ....,r. 11$16oi',ft'(l l .... ll so.oo .... . F I i I ; IU.C IUS UU \981 UU ltU USO 1991 l,SOO 1,200 900 Figure 111 -S19 Revenue Hours Per Employ e e I J i\. l I "'l' _! .. 1 r J 600 300 0 I \.. --+ 19U I U S 1 986 19* 7 U U IU-t "90 1 991 tn2 S PA CE COA ST AREA TRA N S I T Efficiency Measures Figure IIIS14 Operating Expense Per Passenger Trip $6 .00 --$4 .00 $2.00 so.oo 1------ltt-4 I U S ''" 1,.7 ltU 1tU IMO 1991 Itt' 16% 12% 8% Figu r e IIIS17 Farebox Recovery Rati o i\ / .,. f-, v [";; ,.;;.,.,,,,.,,,.. .... W (f')tf : ) I t!84 1,.S 1986 1917 1988 1989 1HO 1 991 1991 $1,20 $0.90 $0.60 $0 .30 50.00 figure 111 Aver age Fare -J '/ ll ....... / 1 \ \ t-; ( ;, . ,;;;;;;,:,.. .. ; .... :1 lL :r-1tt4 tttS 1986 1N7 tt88 1t89 199C) 199 1 1 ,_, 2

PAGE 344

SPCr SUM MAllY System Total passenger miles increased 13 percent from 18,524.630 m iles in 1991 to 20,956)530 in 1992, primarily due to significant increases i n passenger miles lOr 1he purchased and vanpool modes. SPCT a ttrib utes the cominued g.rowlh of Medicai d t ransportation for the passenger mile increase on lhc purchase
PAGE 345

T. T RI-COUNTY COMMUTER RA I L AUTHOR I TY SYSTEM PROFILE Ore;ani7.ational The Tr i -County Commuter Rail Authority is an independent author i ty established by t he Florida Legislature for t h e p u rpose of owning. operating. and maintaining a commuter rail system in the tricounty area of Broward, Dade, a n d Pal m Beach Counties. Gove rning Rod)' and Composition The Tri-Coun ty Commuter Rail Autho rit y is govemed by a n inemember boar d of di r ecto r s that consists of a County Commissi o n e r a ppointe e and a business person app o intee from each of the three count i es a nd three ex-officio members t h at include a represe1\tati\'e of FOOT Dis t riet IV, a Govern o r appointee, a n d a member-at -l a r ge sel ected by the eight other board membe rs. Service Area llle Tri-Coun1y Commuter Rail Autho rity is c h arged with operating and managi ng a commuter r a i l system for the area d efined by B roward Dade. and Pahn B e ac h Counties. Modes Commu1er Rai1. 320

PAGE 346

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Service Area Population (000 } Service IVea Size mires) Passef\ger Trips (000} Pnsenger M iles (000) Vehi c l e Mites (000) Reven u e MOOs {000} Vehiel o Hou r s (000) R evenue Hours ( 000 } R o ute Miles Total Operali"lg EJ:pense {000) Tot>l Opeta!Jn9 Expense (000 ol198-4 $ ) Total Mainlen ance Elq>ense (000) Tot>l MM!Ienance Expense (000 of 198-4 S) Total C a pital Expe nse (000) To!al Loca l Revenue (000) Ope radng Re v-e-nue {000} Passen ger Fare Reven u es (00 0 ) Tot al Employees Transportation Operating Em ployecl MoJntenanc:::e E m p loyees Adm in islfative Emp l oyees Vehicles Available for Max im u m Veh.iciOs Operated in Max im um Service Spare Rati o Total G.allo n s Consum-....d (000) TABLE 111-TI TriCounty Commuter Rail Auth ority Pe-rforma nce Jndic:alors 1917 1 9 ,88 1989 1110 0 .00 0. 0 0 3 ,9 81 04 4 ,058. 1 0 0 .00 0 00 n l a nla 0 00 0 00 291 ,37 1, 0 8 2 1 9 0 00 0.00 9 ,24 0.02 3 2,1 31.97 0.00 0.00 510.90 1, 2 08 .89 0 00 0 00 494.80 1,172 6 2 0 00 0.00 15 .94 4 3.78 0 0 0 0.00 12,44 34. 06 o .oo 0.00 1 32.80 132 .80 $ 0 00 $0.0 0 $ 7, 4 28 5 6 $ 12,708 .93 $ 0 .00 $0.00 $ 6.215.2 5 $10, 122 .77 50.00 $0. 00 $448.45 $ 2,252.33 $0.00 $0.00 $ 375.20 $1,794.00 $ 0 .00 $0.00 $58,04086 $ 0 .00 $ 0 00 so. o o $ 103 4 5 $ 1 ,685. 4 9 s o .oo $0. 00 $ 10 3 4 $ $1 ,685.-19 s o o o so.oo $ 7 6 7 8 $1,63 4 .99 o .oo o .oo 15 00 29 .50 0 00 0.00 1. 00 4 ,00 0 00 0 00 1.00 1.00 0 00 0 00 1 3 00 24.5 0 0 00 0 00 2 3 00 23.00 0 0 0 o.oo 20. 00 20 0 0 n/a nt a 15 00% 1 $ 00% 0 .00 0.00 nl o nil 199 1 1992 198919 2 4,123.12 4 0 0 0 00 0.48% nla t 340.00 nfl 1,870.67 2 266..47 677. 88% 64,469 .46 76,801. 5 1 731.18% I ,563 05 1 892.30 270,39% 1,503 05 1 ,799.89 283 .78' 4 48.47 55.64 2 4 9.14% 38.30 44. 2 7 255.00% 132.&0 132.80 0 .00% $ 13,030. 9 3 $ 1 6 2 4 9 .28 116.74% $9.8t8.77 $11,729. 5 5 88.72% $2,702.76 5 3 6 5 7 2 2 71$.$3% $ 2.036.52 $2,639.96 1103.61% $0.00 $ 11,066 .37 .93% $2,8A9.1 2 $3,5 2 8 3 8 3,310 78% i 52.849.12 53,528 . 38 3.310 78% $2 849 ,12 $3 ,435. 2 3 4 ,374 00% 37.50 211.33% 4.00 2.<0 140.00 % 1.00 1.40 4 0 .00'1 32.50 412. 90 230.0 0 % 23.00 27 00 17.39% 20.00 20 00 0 .00% 15 00% 3 5 00% nta n / a nta nfl NOTE: Tri-Rail's 19!9 Scc.tioe IS o.ly s:b or sinec kt\"ia: .. on 9. 1919 was proKkd a nocou untilk.lnt 1 1m. \\'bell teYCnUC ScfVitt btc u As a rcwll, Oftly one: IMnllt o( f*fc t'CY'C.'IIIIJCS we iftdadc-d in tiN ttpOn. 321

PAGE 347

EFFECTIVE>IESS MEASURE S 1987 SERVI CE SUPPI. Y Vehicio Miles Per Caplla SERVICE CONSUMPTION Patsen gcr Trips Per Cap b P1111nger Trips Pe r Revenue Mite Pnsongor Trips Per Revenue H ou r QUALITY OF SERVICE Avc11g (R MJR.H.) Avorago Aqe of Fltet (in y&af'S) N umber of Incidents TOIJI RNdcals Revenue Mies Between lncidenas (000} Rovenue LUes Between Ro a dc.als (000) AVAIV.IliLITY Revenue Miles Per Rou1e MiSe (000) 322 Ti\BLE 111-Tl TriCounty Commuter Rail Author-ity Ef(eeliv eness Meas-ures 1988 1989 1980 n/a n/a 0 1 3 0 30 n/a nla 0 07 0 27 n/a nla 0 5 9 0 92 n/1 .,. 23.43 31. 77 n/ a n l a 39.79 34.43 nil n /a 1 .0 0 2 00 nla nla nla n/a nta nla nla nla nla n/a .,. nla nta nla n/a nla .,, n/a 3.73 8 .83 1U1 1992 % 1989-19 2 0 38 0.47 268.63 % 0.45 0. 57 674. 19% 1 24 1 26 113.84% us 51.20 118.51% 39 25 40 66 2:.18'% 3 00 3 65 26 5.00% Al a Al a ., .,, 1110 Ala .,, 1110 Ill .,, nla nla 11.32 13.5 5 263 76 %

PAGE 348

EFFIC IE NCY MEASURES COST E FFI C I ENCY Per C3plt>1 O p e r a tin g E xpe n se Per Pea k Veh ic le (000) . Expense Per P4issenger Trip . Operating Exp e nse Per P ass e n ge r M ile . E xpense Per Revenue M il e Ot>e r atlng EXPense Pe r Revenue Hour Ma i nte n a nce Expe n se R eve nue M ile Ma i n t e n a n ce Ex p Per Operating Exp. OPERAT ING RAT I OS F arebox Recovery LoC31 Revenue Per Exp e nse Operati n g Revenue P e r Oples (000) LABOR PRODUCTIVI7Y Ho u r s Per Effi p loy ee (OciO} Passenger Trips Per Employee (000) EN ERGY UTILI ZATIO N Vehicle M i les Pe r Gallo n FARE Aver age Fa r e 1987 TABLE IIIT3 Tri-County Com muler Rail Authority Efficiency Memures nla nla n/a nla nla nta n/a n/a n/a nla n/a n la n/a nta nla nla nta nla nla nla 1988 nta nta nta nla nla nl a n/a nla nla nta nla nta n / a n t a n /a n/a nla nla n / a n / a 1989 $ 1.87 $371.43 $25.50 S0.80 $ 1 5 0 1 $597.39 $0.91 6.04% 1 .03% 1 39% 1 39% 25.55 0 .80 0.97 2 1. 51 0 .54 0-63 19.42 nla $0.26 1990 $3:1 3 $635.45 $11 7 4 $D.40 $1 0 .8 4 $373.13 $ 1.92 1 7 .72% 12 .86% 13.26% 13.26% 60 44 2.19 0.97 50.98 t .46 1,15 36 .68 n/a $ 1 .51 1991 $3.16 5651.55 $6.97 $0.20 $8.67 $340. 2 7 $1.80 20.74% 21.86% 21.86% 21.86% 78. 1 5 2.42 0.96 65.35 1 .67 1 .02 49.88 n/3 $1 52 1992 $4.06 $812. 46 $7,17 $0. 2 1 $9.03 $367.07 $ 2.03 22.51% 21.14% 2 1.7 1% 21.71 % 94. 62 2 78 0 95 66.66 1.{)4 0 95 48. 53 nl a $1 52 %Change 1969-1992 1 1 7 .70% 118.74% 71.88% 73.68% -39.87 % 38.56% 1 24.19% 272.83% 1,945.35% 1,459.28% 1 .459 .28% 270.39% 249. 14% 209 87% 203 .26% 1 4 .35% 149 .85% nta 475.16% 32 3

PAGE 349

GENEI\AL QUESTIONS I. Were any fare changes made during fiscal year 1992? lf so, please provide: th e previ ous fare structure as well as the updat< fare st r u ct ure and i ndicate when the changes were implcmc .ntc.d. N o changc. s were 1nade. 2. Wue ther e any significant changes in service/service area dur ing fiscal year 1992? Four ttains were added to weekday service beginning October 28, 1 991, increasing t he number of trains op erated from 20 to 24 J>er weekday 3. Have there been any recent changes or significant events th a t may help explain the performance of the ttansit syste.m'? S ec response to question 112. 324

PAGE 350

QUESTIONS ABOUT 1992 SECTION 15 DATA 1. As indicated in t he tabl e below, passenger tr ips and revenue miles of ser v i ce increased s ignificantly between 1991 and 1992. P l e .ase describe the changes in servic e that have occurred (sec also question #2 on the survey r orm). Js I he ridership growth so le ly attrib u table to the ser ... ice changes that have been made, o r i s there some other exp l anation? Commuter Ra i l FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change Passenger Tr!ps 1,870.670 21. 2% I I P a ssenge r Mi !es 64.<69,4$0 76, 801,510 19.1% Revenue Miles 1, 503 .050 1 799 890 19.8% Revenue Hours 38.3<>0 44. 270 1$.6 % ------System Response: '01e increases in ridership and the amount of service provided can be auributed t o the addition of four trains to weekday s er vic;e e ff ective October 28. 1991. This addition incre.asc.-d the tota l number of weekday trains from 20 to 24. 2 ToHll oper1'l.ting expense increased from $13,03 0,93 0 in 1 991 to $ 1 6,249,280 in 1992. part ially due to a 35 percent increase in mainteJlaJlCe exp ense ($ 2,702 ,760 in 1991; $3,657 220 in 1992). P lease explain the in maintenance expens e as well
PAGE 351

-------Commuter Rail FY 1991 FY 1992 %Change Ope rat in g Employe-es 4 .0 2.4 I Employees 1.0 1 4 40.0% I Ad minisha t ive E mpl oyees 32. 5 42. 9 32. 0 % ' I Tolal Emp\oyees 3 7 5 46 7 24.5% System Response: No explanation cou l d b e identifie d for t h e changes in each category since Tr i -Rai l could not determine ho w employees wer e categori z e d b y the systcms former Director of f inance. 6 The average a ge of the vehicle fleet increased from 3 .00 years in 1991 to 4.54 years in 1992. I n add i tion the number of ve h icles available for maximum servi ce dccrc
PAGE 352

2,0 0 0 1,600 1 200 800 400 D T RI-C OUNTY C OMMUTE R RAIL A U TH O R I T Y Figure III T1 County/Se rvice Area Pop u l a t i o n {000) S,OOD 4 ,000 1+ 3,000 2.0DD ----1,000 D ---;..--,,.. HS. s nu ua1 uaa '"' o '"' ''n F i gure 111-13 Per formance J ndicators Figure 111-T4 F igur e III -T2 Passen ge r Trip s (ODD) 2,500 2,000 --j ) v D V-L or-, 1 -__ [ _j_ 1,500 1,000 500 0 4 -, I 1 -111 4 IUS 1986 19&7 1 9 U 1 9 1990 1 1 t,l Veh icle Mile s and Revenue Miles T otal Oper ating Expense F igure 111-TS Passenger Fare R e venues (000) --$20.000 S16,00D -$12,000 I -SS.OOD !',DOD ... 1 $0 r-:= = c --..... =r;:: _,_ . r-i 1fOI
PAGE 353

328 TRI-COUNTY COMMU TER R AIL A UTHORITY 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 .2 0.1 0 0 Effc:ctivc:ncss Measur e s Figu r e 111-T8 Vehicle Mi les Per Capita k:' I j 1--IJ / -I -'"' '"s n u an " ,., '"o " nn Figure 111-19 Passenger Tr ips P e r Rev enu e Mile 1 5 1.2 r:: -1-. I L 0 9 0.6 : -r--1 [ L__ -G.3 0.0 tU4 aas " '"' n u "" n '"' a 1 2 4.0 3 0 2.0 1.0 o o Figure III T10 Averag e Age of F lee t (year $ ) -. . j I I ----1--. tU4 uas ''" tttJ ''*' ''*' ,,,o ' "'z

PAGE 354

TRI-COUNTY COMMUTER RAIL AUTHORITY 55.00 $4.00 53.00 $2.00 51.00 $0.00 figure IIIT11 Operating E x p ense Per Capita v 7 1 ------------., 1985 1 916 "" "" "" l t')O 1 991 19\12 Figure 111-T14 Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile Sl.SO -. ---. i f 1-$1.50 $2.00 S1.00 S0. 50 :----1 --1--50.00 1 19$ $ ,,., 1 981 ''" "" 199(1 , 1 992 1.200 900 600 300 0 Figure III T17 Revenue Ho urs P er Empl oyee V-' t---------r-1--. -_J __ -----19!4 U 8S \986 I H 1 19U 17&9 ,,,0 W H 1991 Efficiency Me.asurcs F i gure IIIT12 Operating E>cpense Per Pa ssenger T r ip SlO.OO -i ---$20.00 $10.00 --50.00 1 -tttt lft.S 198(. ue1 1 "" USQ ,,, nn 251' --201' 1 51' 1 01' I -0% I Figure I IIT15 Farebox Recovery R a t io =+ L I r ; --1 -1984 IUS 19tG 1181 IUt ltU 1993 1 991 1 991 50,000 40,000 30.000 20 000 10,000 0 Figure 111-T18 Pass enger Trips Per Employee --,_ -------V_ _I I J. ---... ..-. v -----....... ------... -U84 IUS 1986 1,87 UU aU U'l l"l Figure lliT13 Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile 516.00 rklJ S12.00 u .oo ----1 54.00 -r-i I so.oo --1984 1SlS 1986 1U"J ltU 1 989 1 990 1991 1992 Figure liiT16 Vehicle Miles Per Peak Vehicle 100.000o-_T_J_ r r-r-I 80,000 ---1. 60,000 40,000 2 o ,ooo 1 1 1 o I--l-nat tUS 1?t6 1,.? 1911 19U 19 1991 lnl $1.60 $1.20 --$0.80 -$ 0.40 so.oo --... .. figure III T19 Average Fare -----;----.., --_ .... I . l r-1------------... ' ,,... ,.,85 ttM .,., " '"' nso "" tHl 329

PAGE 355

TRIC SUM MAllY 330 lr is ev ident from the data tha t ridership and the amoUIH of service provided by Tr i-Rail inc-reased significantly betwee n 1991 and 1992. Passenger trips increased 21 percent, revenue miles increased 20 percent, revenue hours 16 percent, and the number of vehicles available for maximum se-rvice increased 17 percent According to TriRail, these increases resulted from the addition of four trains to weekday servic e in October 1991. To1af operating expense increased 25 per cent from $13,030.930 in 1991 to $16,249,280 in 1992, while maintenance expense increased 35 percent during this period ($2,7 02,760 i n I 991; $3,657.220 in 1992) Tr i Rail attributed both of t hese increases to the additional weekday service initiated durin g FY 1992. Passenger fare revenue increased from in 1991 to $3,435,230 in 1992, an increase of21 percent. This i ncrease resulted in 24 percent i nc reases in both total local and operating revenue. T r i-Rail 1ha1 I he increase in fare reve -nue can be auributcd to the increase in ridership that res-Ulted from Tri-Rail's additional weekday trains. Total employees increased 24 percent from 37.5 FTEs in 1991 to 46.7 FTE.s in 1992. with the majority of the increase occurring in the administra t ive e-mployee classification. However, no exp l anation could be i dentified for these changes since Tri-Rail was unable to determine how employees were catcgoriz.cd by the system's former Director of Finance.

PAGE 356

VI. SUMMARY In summary, the Center for Urban Transponati on Research (CUTR) has conducted a performance evaluation of Flo rid a transit systems under c ontract w ith t h e Office of Public Transportation Operations. Department of Transpo na t ion, Sta t e of Florida. The perfonnance eval ua tion includes a trend analysis (198 4) and a peer review analysis (1992 data) T11is document (Part 1) is the trend a n a lysi s while a separate document (Part II) reports the results of t he peer review a naly sis. The trend analysis reviews the general statewide t re n d as well as the Florida ftxedroute total system trend from 1984 t hroug h J n addition, thi s report p r esents the performance trend for each of Florida s fixed-route tmnsit systcms for t he same time per iod. The data is presented in bo t h tabular and graphical formats t o enable t he reader to more easily evaluate the trends and comparisons. Specific comments about t h e d at a or modifications t ha t were made t o the data are included for each Florida transit system. alo n g with summary comment s t ha t identify and exp lain major changes (a ten percen l increase or dC(:rcase i n a perfonnance indicator from 1991 to 1 992) i n the performance indicators. Comments and questions about t his report can be directed to t he Office of Publi c Transportation Operations, Department of Transportation, Sta t e of Florida. 605 Suwannee Stree t Mail Station 26, Tallahassee, Florida, 323990450 Telephone: (904) 488-7774. 33 I

PAGE 357

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS APPENDIX A LIST OF DEFINITIONS County / Service Area Population for 1991 and prior county population is used to approximate the service area population for each of the Flor ida t ransit systems and is taken from the Florida Statistical Absrracl for each year. The only exception is Smyrna Transit System (SMTS), for which the population of t he city of New Smyrna Beach is used to approximate the servi ce area population for these years. This measure provides a suitable approximation of overall market size for comparison of r elative spending and service levels among communities in t he absence of actual service area population. However, in 1992, FTA beg a n requiring trMsit systems t o provide se.f'Vice area population in their Section IS reports. As a result, this is the measure that is now utilized in this study. Narional fnflarion Rate Used to deflate the operating expense data to cons tant 1984 dol lars. TnOation-adjustcd dollars provide a more accurate re presentation of spending changes resulting from agency decisions by factoring out the general price inflation. The inflation rate reported i s the percentage change i n the Consumer l)rice Index (CPJ) for all items (including commodities and services) from year to year. During the 1984 to 1991 period, service and labor costs tended to increase a t a faster rate than did commodity prices. lllerefore, transi t operating expenses. which are predominantly comprised of serv i ce and labor costs, may be expected to have increased somewhat faster than in Oat i o n even i f the amount of service provided were not increased. Trim Annual number of passenger boardings on the transit vehicles. A trip is counted each time a passenger boards a transi t vehicle. Thus. if a passenger has to transfer \l(:tween buses to reach a destination, he/she is counted as making two passenger t rips. P:1ssenger Miles Number of annual passenger trips multiplied by the system's average trip length (in miles). This number provides a measure of the total number of pa.sse.ngcr miles or transportation service consumed. Vehicle Miles Total distance traveled annually by revenue service vclli cles, including bot h revenue: miles deadhead miles. ltcvcnue Mile5 Number of annual miles of vehicle operation while in active service (available to pick up revenue passengers). TI1is number is smaller than vehicle miles because of t he exclusion of deadhead miles such as vehicl e miles from the garage to the stan of service, vehicle miles from the end of ser vice to the garage. driver training, and other miscellaneous miles that are not considered to be in d irect revenue service. Vehicle Hours T o t a l hours of ope -rati o n by revenue service vehicles including hours consumed in passenger service and deadhead travel. Revenue Hours Total h.ours of operation by revenue service vehicles in aclive revenue service. Route Miles Number of directional route miles as reported in Section 1 5 data; defined as the mileage that service operates in each directi011 over routes traveled by public transp ortation vehicles in revenue service. Total Operating Expense ReJ)ortcd total spending on operations, inclu din g administration, maintenance, and operation of scr ... iec vehicles. 332

PAGE 358

Total Opentting Expenses (1984 Sl Tota l operating expenses deflate d to 1984 dolla r s for purposes of detemlin ing t he real change in spen ding for operating expenses. Total i\1!lintem1nce F..xnense -Sum of all expenses categorized as mai1Henance a subset of total operating expense. Total Maintenance Expense (1984 $)Total maintenance expenses deflated to 1984 dollars for purposes of determining the real change in spending for mairuenance purpos<.'S. Total Capit:l Expense -Dollar amount of spending for capital projects and equipment. Tot" I Local RC\cnuc-All revenues originating at the local level (excluding state and federal assistance). Oecratine lte't'enucJncludes passenger fares, special tnmsit fares, school bus service reve11ues, freight tariffs, chi:lrt er service revenues, a u x i liary transportati o n revenues, subs idy from ot h er sectors of operations, and non transportatiOI\ revenue .s. Passenger Fare RevenuesRevenue generated annually from passenger fares. Total F.mployees Total number of payroll employees of the transit agency. It is useful to note t h at the increasing t endency to contract out for services may re -sul t i n some sign i ficant differences in this measure betwc.-cn otherwise similar propcn ies. It is imponanr to understand which services arc contracted before drawing co nclus ions bused on employee le -vels. All employees classified as capital were excluded from this report Tra1upor1 ation Oneratine; F.mployee-s-All employees classified us operat ing employees: vehicle d rivers, supervisory personnel, d irect personn el. Maintenance EmJ)foye-es t\11 employees clilssified a s milintenance employees w h o a r c directly o r indirectly responsible for vehicle maintenance. Administrative EmpiO)'tes-All personnel positions classified as admi n i strative in nature. This report includes all ge n e ra l administrntion employec:s (marketing, p l anning and support) ns chLSsified by FTA in Form 40 4 Vehicles Available for Maximum Service Number of \'Chicles owned by t he transit authori ty tha t are availa ble ror use in service. Vehicles Operated in Ma ximum Service The largest number of vehicles r equired for providing service dur ittg peak hours (cypically c h e rush peri
PAGE 359

Tolal Kilowatt liours or PowerKilowatt hours of propulsion power consumed by a lransit system (rapid rail and automated guideway). Average Age of FlfcfT raditionally a standard transit coach is considered 10 have a useful life or 12 years. However. l onger service lives are not uncommon. The ve-hicle age and t he reliability record of the equipment, t he number of miles and hours on the equipment, the sophistication and fea1ures (i.e., wheelchair lifts, electronic destination signs, ete . } and operating environment {we.ather, roadway grades, and passenger abuse) all affect the. maintenance needs and depreciation or lhc bus llccl. Number of Incidents -Total number of unforeseen occurrences resulting in casuahy (in j ury/fatal ity), co!Hsion, or property damage in excess of $l ,000. For an incident to be reportable. i t must i nvolve a transit ve-hicle or occur on t ransit property. Total Roadcalls -A re-\'enuc service intem1ption during a given r eporting period caused b y failure of some mechanical element or other clement. EFFECTIVF.NESS MEASURES Vehicle Per Capita Total nurnber of annual vehicle mile s div ided by the servite a rca"s population. 11tis can be charac.tcriz.cd as the nunlbcr of rniles of service provided for each man, woman, and child in t he service area and is a measure of the extensiveness of service provided in the service area. Passenger Trip$ Capita A veF.J.ge number of transit boardings per person per year. Tllis number is larger in areas where public transportatiOJ\ is emphasized a n d in areas where t h ere are more t ransit dependents, and is a measure of I he extent to which the public utilizes lransit in a given service area. Passenger Trips Per Revenue MileThe ratio of passenger t rips t o revenue miles of service; a key indiea1or of service effectiveness that is inOucnced by the levels of demand and t h e supply of service provided. Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour-The ratio of passenger lrips to revenue hours of operation; reports on the effectiveness of the service since hours are a better representation of t h e resources consumed in prov i ding seJVice. A \'eragc Sneed vcrage speed of vehicles in operation (including to and from the garage) calculated by dividing total veh icle miles by Iota) vehicle hours. Revenue Miles Between lnc.idcnts Number of revenue miles divided by the number of iocidents; re p orts the average interval, in miles, between incidenls. Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls Number of revenue m iles divided by roadcalls ; an indicat or of the average. frequency of delays because of a problem with t he equipment. Revenue Miles Per Rouce MileN umber of revenue m i les divided b y the number of directional route miles of service. 334

PAGE 360

EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ot)eratine; Per Capita-Annual opera tin g budge t d i vided by th e c ounty/se r vice area pop u la tion; a meas u re of the resource commitment to transit by t h e community. O[!erat in g Expense Per Peak Vehicle Total ope rating expense pe r vehicle opera ted in maximum service (peak vehicle); provide s a measur e of the resources required per vehicl e to have a eoach in operatio o for a year. Qpcr-Ming f..xncnsc Per Passenger Trin Operat irlg expenditu res divided b y t he total annual a measure of the effic i ency o f transport ing riders; one of t he key ind i cato rs of comparative per fonnance of transit properties since it reOetts bot h the efficiency with which se rv i ce is delivered a n d the market demands for the service. Expense Per l >assengcr Reflection o f operatint expense divided by t he number of passenger miles; take s into account the impact of trip l ength o n pcr f onnance since some operators p rovide l engt h y trips while o t he r s provide shon t rips. Operating Exncnse Per Re .venue Mile Operating expense divided by the a nnual revenue m i l es of service ; a meas ure or the efficiency \vith which se r vice i s delivered imd is :.mother key comparative indiCi 1tor. Operating E xpens e t>er Revenue Hour-Operating e xpe11se divided b y r evenue h ours of a key comparative m easure whic h differs from opera ting expense per vehicle m i l e in t ha t t h e vehicl e speed is f actored out. This is often i mportant since vehicle speed is strongly influe. nced by local trafllc co n diti o n s Mainten:tnce Ex pense Per Revenue Mile Maintenance cost divided by the revenue miles M:tinten;tncc [xpense Per Operating Expense Calc ulated by divi ding maintena nce exp.cnse by opem tin g exptJ\Se; expressed as a percen1 of total opcr;Hing expense. Fnrcbox n.cco\'ery Ratio of passenge r f"re revenues to total oper
PAGE 361

Revenue M iles Per Vehicle MileReOecls how much of l h e total vehicle operat ion is in passenger service H i gher ratios arc favor able, b ut garage l oeation t rain i n g needs, and other cons iderations may influenc e the ratio Re" enuc Miles Per T otal Total revenue miles of service that are provided by each vehicle availab le f o r maximum service. R e venue Hours Per Total VehiclesIndi cat es total revenue hou r s of service provided by each vehicle available for maximum se .rvice. Reven ue Hours Per Emotoycc-RcOccts overall labor pr
PAGE 362

APPENDIX B ltEVIEW OF DATA SOURCES SOUitCES FOR 1984-1987 DATA National Urban Mass Transportation Statistics 19841987 Annual Section IS Repor ts' D:tta Item County/ City Population. National Inflation Rat e Passenger Trips Passe-nger Mil.es Vehicle M i les Revenue Miles Vehicl e Hours Revenue Hours Ro u te Miles Total Oper ating cxp
PAGE 363

NOTES: 338 Data Item Total Gallons Consumed Kilowatt l lours of Propulsion Power Average Age of Fl eet' Number of lncidents9 Number of Roadcalls1 0 'All statistics a r c for direct ly-operated motorbu s service unless otherwise noted. Source Tab l e 3 .12 Table 3.12 Table 3.17 Table 3.15 Table 3.11 1Qperating expense excludes all reconciling items including interest expe-nse. lea'>es and rentals, and depredation. )rncludes vehicle maintenance and maintenance expense. Referre-d to as total public capital assistance in federal Section 15. TlliS figure is reported as a transit system total and therefore may include purchased and/or deman d-responsive Hansportation services. 'Local revenue includes all revenue in Tab le 3 .0 I except for federal and state revenue. Operating revenue includes transponation revenues. non transportation re-venues, and subsidy from other sectors of ope r ations (denoted as other in column 10 of Fom1 3.01 ). Revenues are r eported as a t ransit system total and therefore may i nclude purchased and/or demand-responsive t ra n sportation services. However> passenger fare revenues for fixed-route services can be extracted from the data source. 'Employees are dist ributed among three ca tegories on Form 3.14: transportation, maintenance. and general administration. These three categories are used for distribution in our data as well. 'Data reported dif f erently in 1984 than in following years w hich required pulling data from differe nt fon ns in tha t year. Veh ic les operated in max.imum service are for those used for directly-operated services only. 'lhe following vehicle types were included in t h e calculation of average age of fleet: motorbus (BA> BB> BC). ar1iculated motorbus (AB). doub l e--decked bus ( DB), trolley bus (TB), and school bus (SB). Also, age of rail flee t includes two vehicle ty pes : rapid rail (RR) and stre e tcar (SC) It s h ould be recognized that some of these vehi cles may be used in t he provis ion of de,nand-responsive transportation services as these vehicles cannot be i dentified in the federal r e port "fncludes incidents involving collisions. derailments. personal casualt ies, and fires. 1 01ncludes failure and other reasons.

PAGE 364

SOURCES FOR 1988-1 992 DATA A
PAGE 365

NOTES: 340 Data Hem Kilowatt Hours of P ropu lsion Power' Average Age of F l eet' Number of Incidents* Number of 'All statistic.s arc for direct l yoper;ned motorbus service unless otherwise noted. Source Form 402 Fom1 408 Form 405 Form 402 20perating expense excludes all reconcil ing items including interest expense. leases and r entals, and dep r eciation. 1This figure is rep oned as a t ransi t system total for years prior to FY 1992 and therefore may inc lude purchased a nd/or demandresponsive trnns))Qrtation services for those years. 4Local revenue includes all revenue except federal and state revenue. Operating rc.venuc inch1dcs transportation revenues, non-tmn. sportation revenues, and subsidy f rom othe r secwrs of ope-rations. Revenues arc repOrted as a transit system total and therefore may inc l ude purchased and/or demand responsive transportation services. However, passenger fare revenues for fixed-route service can be extracted from the data source > Through FY 1991) employees were dist ributed among three cat egories as identified in Form 404: rows 1 transportation operating employees, rows 4-8 -maintenance employees, rows 9-10 -admin istrative emp l oyees F or FY 1992, employees were distributed among the categories in fonn 404 as follows: rows 1 2 transponation operating employees, rows 5 6 maintenance empl oyees, rows 3, 4, and 7 administra t ive empl oyees FT A assumes that Form 404 00-MB e -xcludes p urc hased t ransportation services. A assumes that energy consumption reported on Fonn 402 excludes purchased transportation services. 'The following vehicle types were included in the calculation of averag e age o f fleet: motorbus (BA, BB, BC), articula t ed motorbus (AB), double-decked bus (DB), trolley bus \rB), and school bus (SB) Also, age of rail fleet inc l ude s two vehicle types: rapid rail (RR) and stree t car (SC). It shoul d be recognized that some of these veh icles may be used in the provisio n of demand-respons ive transporta tion services as these vehic.fes cannot be identified on fom1 408. 'fncludes incide.nts involving collisions, derailments, personal casualties, and fires. F T A assumes that Form 405 excludes purchased transportat ion services. 9(ncludcs mecha nita l failure and oth er reasons. FTA assumes that Fom1 402 (ro.adealls) excludes purchased transportat ion service s

PAGE 366

Transit System M e troD!>5 Appleyard Drive T a ll a hassee, F l 32304 100 S E 101h Avenue GOline$ville, FL 32602 950 8%) T r e e Road South D aytona, FL 32119..15 15 1 5 West F 3it1leld Orive Pensacola, F L 3 2501 10715 E Airport Road Ft. Myets, F L 33907 5303 Pinkney Avenu e Sara sota, Fl 34233-2 42 1 Directors & Contact Person(st Mr. Cheste r "Ed" Colby ExecutN& D ir ector Mr. Jack R. Furney, T r a n sit Con t r o l&er Mr. Mkhael J Scanlo n Dir ector Ms. Lorr aine Smith, Transit Manager Ms. Elys e H eyman. Tran $ i t Mr Mic hae l SlayiOd<, D i rector of Mass T ra n sit Ms. Sharon Oen t. E.xecuUve D ir ecto r Ms. Oeborah J Ward, Director o f Finance Ms. Oia na Ca(soy, Oi(O<;;or o f Plann in g Mr. R oger Sweeney Executive D i recto r Ms. Pa t ri c i a Hard ima n Dir ec tor of Fin ance /Ad m in, Mr. Paul Skoulelas, E xecut i v e Oiree1or Mr. Rob Gregg. M anager o f Mr. 11'\ling .. Bud" Cure, Director Mr. Jerry Brya n Project Manager Mr J o h n l Carter Oirect()r Mr W illiam Carte r T tansit P lanner Mr. Russ Olvera. Execu t i ve Dir e ct o r Mr George Boyle, Pro gra m M a nager Mr. Kenneth R. Fischer. Genera l Manag e r Ms. Becky Weedo, D i rector of Administ ra tio n M r Kenneth P Westt>ro()k, R eside n t MMager Ms. Ramona Cavasos A d minis tcativ e Assistant M r James I Fetzer Directo r Mr. Chris Leffert Transit A n alyst Mr. Jay A G o odWin. Executive fh2!l!. (3 05) 375-567 5 ( 305) 357-8301 (9 04 ) 6303 181 (8 1 3 ) 623-5835 {813) 53 0 (407) 84179 (<07) 233 1111 (904) 6 9 100 (904) 3342609 ( 904) 761-7600 (904) 436 -9386 (8 13}2770 12 (8 13) 951-5850 34)

PAGE 367

Transit System L .lkoland Area Mass Transit District Manatee Cou nty T ransit StnyrM Tr

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
1992 performance evaluation of Florida transit systems : part I : trend analysis, 1984-1992
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
Florida. Office of Public Transportation Operations
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
Publisher:
Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Bus lines--Florida--Management   ( lcsh )
Local transit--Florida--Evaluation   ( lcsh )
Bus lines--Florida--Evaluation   ( lcsh )
Genre:
letter   ( marcgt )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
usfldc doi - C01-00056
usfldc handle - c1.56
System ID:
SFS0032178:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader ntm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s flunnn| ||||ineng
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00056
040
FHM
049
FHmm
2 110
Florida. Office of Public Transportation Operations.
0 245
1992 performance evaluation of Florida transit systems : part I : trend analysis, 1984-1992
260
Tampa, Fla
b Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
c 1994 March
650
Bus lines--Florida--Management
Local transit--Florida--Evaluation
Bus lines--Florida--Evaluation
710
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
1 773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.56



PAGE 2

1992 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF FLORIDA TRANSIT SYSTEMS PART I Trend Analysis, 1984-1992 Prepared for The Office of Public Transportation Operations Department of Transportation State of Florida By Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida Final Report, March 1994

PAGE 3

This is a blank page

PAGE 4

1992 I Eili'ORM A NCE EVALUATION OF FLORIDA TRANSIT SYSTEMS PART I TREND ANALYSIS, 1984 -1992 SECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS PACE TABLE OF CONTBNTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v LIST OF F IGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I II. Ill. IN-ntODUCTION . . ........ .... ................ ...... ................. ..... ..... ... . . ... A Tlle Purpose of Performance Review .... ............ .... ...... ..... .. . ................ 0 l'erformance Review Da1a Base ....... . ....... . ....... . .. .......... ....... ..... . .... C 111e Role of Pfivatizarion .... ................ . ... . .................. . ................. . STATE WID TREND ANA L YSIS . .... . ...... ... .. .. . ........ ....... . . ... A. Statev.ide Directional Trends ... . ........... . .... . ...... . ........ .................... B Flo r ida F i xed-Route Tota l Trend SYSTEM-BY-SYSTEM TREND ANALYS I S A B. c D E F. G. H I. J K. L Metro8Dade Transil Agency .......... ...... ....... . .. .......... ..... ... ..... .... B roward Transit Division . ................... ..... .... . .. . ....... . ... ............. . Jacksonvil1e lransport
PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION P AGE S. Space Coast Area Transit (Brevard County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 T. Tri Co u nty Commuter Rai l Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 IV. SUMMARY . ......... .................. . ........... ........ .... ........ ... ....... .... .... 331 APPENDIX A List of Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 APPENDIX B -Review of Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 .17 APPENDIX C C ontact Listing for Florida Transit Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 iv

PAGE 6

TABLE INTRODUCTION 1 1 1 LIST OF TABLES Performance Review Indicator s a n d Measures, Trans i t Services ...... . . . ........ ..... Performance Revie w I n dicat ors a n d Measures, Purch ased M o t orbus Transit Servi c e s .... ..... . . . .... . . . .... STAT EWIDE TREN D ANALYSI S II A I IIB I llB 2 11-83 11114 JI-BS 11-86 S ta t ewide Directiona l Trends in Key I n d i c a to rs and Measures. 1991 1 992 .... . .......... ........ ....... S tatewide Tota l Performance Indi ca to r s (Excluding P urchased Moto rbus) ..... . ... . . ... .... . ........ Statewide Tot a l Ef f ectiveness Measures (Excludi n g Purchased Mot o rbus) . ....... . . . ..................... S tatewi d e To t a l Efficiency M eas u res (Excluding Purc-hased Motor bus) ..... . . ............ . .... .... . Statewide Tow.l Performrulce Indicato r s (Incl u d ing Purchased M o t orbus) .... . ... .... ............... . . .. S t a tewide Tot a l Effec tiveness M<.oasurc:s (Inc l ud ing Purchased M otorbu s ) . .... .... .... .... .......... .... S t atewide Tota l Emciency Measures (Including Purc hase d Motorbus) . .... ............ . .... ...... .. SYSTEM-BY-SYSTEM TREND ANAL Y SIS PAGE 9 1 0 1 2 1 5 16 1 7 2 1 22 2 3 111 1 Orga nizat ional Structures o f F l orida Transit Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . JO lll 2 Modes Opera ted b y Flor i d a Transit Systems (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l l lll 3 Abbr eviations for F lorida Transit Sy s tems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J 2 Metro-Dade Tran s it Agency lllA I lll-A2 IIIA3 III-A4 lllAS IIIA6 IIIA 7 IIIA8 IIIA9 Ill A I 0 Ill-A I I lll A 1 2 Ill A 1 3 Ill A 1 4 Ill A IS Ill A 16 Ill A 1 7 Ill A 18 Directly O p era t ed Motorb u s Perfonnance IndicatOr s ..................... ... ......... ..... ... . P urchased Mot orbus Perfonnance I ndica t ors .................... ............................. . . . Directl y Opera t ed and P urchased M otorbus Pcrform;mce I n d icators ... . ...... ... ... .......... . Rapid Rail Performance Indicators ....... . ....... .................. .............. ... ....... .. Automated Guidewa y Perfomu m ce Indicators ......... .... ........ ........ . .... . . .... ........ System To t a l P erformance Jndictnor s (Excluding P urchased Moto r b u s) ............................. ...... System Total Performance Indi c a to r s ...... ................. ........... . ..... ....... . . . . .... Directl y Operated Motorbus Effectiveness Measures . ..... . ................... . .... .... ....... Purchased Motorbus Eff<.'Ctivcncss Measu res ......................... ...... ...... ..... . ... .. Direc tly Ope rated and Purchased Motorbus Effec-tive.ness Measures . ...................... . ...... ...... Rap i d Rail Effectiv e ness Measures .... .... ................ ............ ......... . . . . ........ Automated Guideway EJfec t ivcness Measures . ................ . ................. , ...... . .... System To tal Effectiveness Me.asures (Excludillg P urc hased Motorbus) ....... ............. .... . ....... Syste m Total Effectiven e s s Measures ....... .... ..... . ......... . . . ........... . .............. D irect l y O perated Moto r b u s Efficiency Measures ............... ..... .......... ........ ......... ... Purchased Moto rbus Effici e ncy M easur es .... ........... . . ....... .... . ..... .. ........... Directly-Operated and P urchase d Motorbus Efficie.ncy Measu r e s ..... . ..... ........... .... . .... .... . . Rapi d Rai l Efficiency Measures . . . ................ . . ................... ....... ............ 34 3 5 36 37 38 39 40 4 1 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 4 9 50 ll v

PAGE 7

vi TABLE fiiAI9 IIIA20 fiiA21 LIST OF TABLES Automated Guideway E.ffici e ncy Meas\lrcs . ....... ....... ... .. . ......... ....... ....... . . ... System Tota l Efficie n cy Measures (excluding P urc hased Mot orb us) ..... ................. . . .. .. ..... System Total Efficien c y Measures .... ........ ............. ....... ............ . ...... ... ....... B roward Transit Divi sio n PAGE 52 5 3 5 4 IIIB 1 Dire<:tly Opera t ed Motorbus Per formance Indic ato rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 0 IIIB2 Purchased Moto rbus Perfom1ance Indicat ors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 111-BJ S ystem Total Per f onnan e e Ind i ca t ors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 JII-B4 Directly -Operated Motorbus Effectiveness Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3 IIIBS Purc hased Motorbus Effecti v eness Measur e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 111-86 System T o t a l Effectiveness M easures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 111-07 DircctlyOpc::ratcd Motorbus Efficiency Measur e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6 IIIBS Purc hased M oto rbus Efficiency Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 System rotal Efficiency Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Jacksonville Transportation Authority 111C I D i r ectly-Operated Motorbus Performan c e I n d i cators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Automated Guideway Perfonnance Ind icator s ......... .... . . ....... ....... . ....... . . . . . . . 89 111-CJ Sy stem T o tal Performance Indi cators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 lll C4 Directly-Oper a ted Motorbus Effectiven ess Measures . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1 Automated Guideway Effectiveness Measures ... ... . ... .... .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 III C6 S y stem Tota l Effcotiveness Measures ..... .... . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 IIIC 7 Direclly Op e r ated Motorbus Efficiency Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4 llfC 8 Automated G u ideway Efficie n cy Measures . . ...... . . . ........ . . .... . ...... . . . . 95 ll lC9 System Tot a l Efficie ncy Measures ......... . .... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 H illsborough A rea Regional Transi t Pcrfonnan c e Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 5 111 Effe<:tive n ess Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 111 Efficienc y Meas u r es ........... .... .... .... . ....... . .... ... ... . . . . . . I 07 P inellas Suncoast Transit Autho rity IIIE I P e rf onnancc I n dicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 IIIE2 Effecti veness Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 III EJ Efficiency Measures .......... . . . .... ........ .. .... ..... . . . . . . . . . . 118

PAGE 8

TABL E Lyn x (Orlando} 111-FI IIIF2 111-F3 111 -F4 111-FS 111-F6 111-F1 111-FS IIH9 LI S T O F TABLES D irecdy-Op enne d M o t orbus Perfonnance I n d icators ... .... ......................... ... ........ . . Purchased M o lorbu.s Perf onnance Indicat ors .... .... ................ .............. ........ .... Sysctm Total Performance. Indicators .... ..... . . . . ........................... .. . .... Oirectly-Opemted Motorbus Effectiveness Measures . ............ .................................... Pun:lwed Motcxbted Motorb
PAGE 9

T ABLE L I S T OF TABLES PACE Escambia County Transit System III K I Performance lndica l M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 IIIK2 Effectiveness Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 IIIK3 Efficiency Measur es . . .. .. . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. 19S Lee County Transit Authority lli L I D ir eclly Operaled Motorbus Performa n ce Indicator s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 II J.l.,2 Purchased Motorbus Performance Indica t ors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0 S JJ1.[.3 SySicm T olal Performance Indicators . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. 206 JJ1.[.4 D irectl y -Operated M o t o rbus Eff ec tiv e ness Measu r e s . . . .. .................. ... . . . . . . . . 2 0 7 II J.l., S Purchased Mo1orbus E ff ectiveness M easures . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. . 208 111 1..6 S ystem Total Effectiveness Mea.ur._, .... ............ . . . . .... .. .. . . . . . . . . 209 lli L7 Dire c tl y Operated Motorbus Effic i e ncy Measururchased Motorbus Perfommnce Indi ca t ors ... ..... . .... . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4 3 111 S )"tem Total f>erformance Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244 111 Dir ec tly-Operated Motorbus E ffe<:tiveness Measures ..... .. . .... .. .. . . . . . . . . 24$ III-OS Purchased M otorbus E ffectiveness Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 111 SySiem Tot al Eff e ctiveness Measui'C$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 111 Directly-Operated Motorbus Efficiency Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24& 111& Purchased MotO
PAGE 10

TABLE LIST OF T ABLES PAGE Smyrna Transit System Ill-PI Perfonnance Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 IJJ-P2 Effectiveness Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 111-Pl Efficiency Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 Pasco Area Transportation Service 111-Ql PerfOrn\ance Indica tors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 III-Q2 Effec tiveness Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 111-Q3 Efficie n c y Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272 Key West Tnmsit AUihority JJI R 1 Dir<.'Ctly-Oper ated Moto rb us Pe rfonnance I nd i cators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 IJJ-R2 Purchased Mot o rbus Perfonnance Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 111-Rl System 'fotal Performance l n dicaws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 lll R4 Directly Ope r ated Moto r bus Effective n ess Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 111-RS Purchased Motorbus Eff <"
PAGE 11

LIST OF TABLES TABLE T r i-County Commutet Rail Authority 111-TI Perfonnance Indicators ....... . . . ...... . .......................... . ..... ..... .... .... . Ill T2 Effectiveness Measures ......... . ... . .... . . ......... ... ... .... ... ........ 111"3 Efficiency Measures ... ... ........... ........... . ... .... ... . . . ...... . . X PAGE 321 322 323

PAGE 12

FIGUR E INTRODUCTION J 1 1-2 1 3 LIST O F FIGURES Performance Evaluation Statutes ............. . . . . ... . . , ... .... ......... ... . ......... F loridas Tnmsit Systems ...... . . . . .... . .... ........ .... ..... . . . . ........ ........... Fact ors Affecting Transit Perf o rmance ...... ... . ...... . . .............. . ........ . ......... . STATEWIDE TREND ANALYSIS Statewide Total Exch1ding Purch a sed Motorbus 11B 1 County/S e rvice Arcu Popu l ation .. ... ....... .... ............... .... .... ......... .... ..... H -B2 Passenger Trips . ........ ...... ....... ..... .... . ........................ ........... 11-83 Vehicl e MiJes and Revenu e Miles .... ........ .... .... . . ............... ..... .... . ....... . II-B4 Total Ope rating Expense ............... ............ ..... . ...... ...... . . ....... 11-85 Passenger Fare Revenu es ...... .... . ..... . ...... ............... .... ........................ 11B6 Tota l Employees .... ........... ... . ......... . ...................... . .... . .. 11-07 Vehicles in Maximum Service .............. ...... . ....... . . . . .... .... . . . ......... . . 11-BS Vehicle Miles Per Capita . . ........ .... . . ......... ..... .......... .................... 11-89 Passenger Trip$ Per Revenue M i l e ...... .. ... .... ... ........ ........ . ....... ......... .... 11-BI O Average Age of Fleet ........... ............ .......................... . .......... . . .... U B II Revenue Miles Between Incidents. ... . ........ .... ................ . ..... .... . ... ......... ... Jl812 Revenue M iles Betwe e n ....................... .............. ... .... ........ ......... ll B I 3 Operating Expense Per Capita ........ ........ ........ ...... ... ........ ................. 11ll14 11B 15 ll-BI6 ll lll7 ll-BI8 11-819 IIB20 11-921 Operating Expense Per Passenger Tri p . . .... . ... ... ............ ...... .... .. ..... ..... , ... Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile .... ..... ............... ..... . . . ... ......... .......... Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mil e ................ .............. . ......... ...... ..... .... . Farebox Recovery Ratio . ......... .... . . ..... ........ ........... ................. ... ..... Vehicle Miles Per Peak V ehicle ............. ..... . ....... . ....... ........... . ..... . .... Revenue Hours Per Etnployee .... ...................... ....... ............ . ............. . . Passenger T rips Per Employee .... .... ... ... ........ ......................... ......... ... ..... Average Fare ......... .................. .... . ....... ... ...... .. .. .. ...... ...... .. Statewide Total I ncludin g Purchased Motorbus Jl-B22 County/Service Area Population ............ . ................ .... . ..... . . ........ ........ ll -B23 Passenger Trips ........ . ...... ....... ..... ....... .......... ........ ..... .... 11824 Vehicle Miles and Revenu e Miles ..... ... ............... .... .... ... .... ............ ... 11-92 5 Total Ope ra ting Expense .......... .......... . .......... ........... ...... . ...... ... . .... li -B26 Veh i cles in Maximum Service ........... . , ...... . ............... . ........ ................. II-B27 Vehicle Miles Per Capita .......... ..... .............. ........... .... .... ..... ...... . .... PAGE 3 5 6 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 1 9 19 1 9 1 9 19 20 20 20 20 2 0 20 20 20 20 24 24 24 24 24 25 x i

PAGE 13

FIGURE 11-928 11-029 11 11-831 11-932 LIST OF FIGURES Passenger Trips Per Revenue M ile. ......... ..................................... ... ............. Operating Expense Per Capita ....................... ....... . . . ......... ..... ... ......... .... Operat ing Expense Per Passenger Trip ...... , . ............................. ... . ..... ......... Operating Expense Per Revenue: Mile ...................................... . ............ . ... .. Vehicle Miles Per Peak Vehicle .. ..... ........ . ..... ....... .. ..... ........ ..... PAC 2 5 26 26 26 26 SYSTEM -BY-SYSTEM TREND ANALYSIS Metro-Dade Tr ansit Agency System Tota l Exclud ing l'urc h ased Motorbu s III-AI Coun ty/Service Area Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 111-A2 Passenger Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 IIIA3 Vehicle Miles and Revenue Miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 IIIA4 Total Operating Experu<: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 IIIAS Passe nger Fate Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 lllA6 Tolal Employe e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 IIIA7 Vehicles in Maximum Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Ill -AS Vehicl e Miles Per Capill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 IIIA9 Passtnger Trips Per Revenue Mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 IIIA 10 Revenue Miles Between lncicknl5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 111-A II Revenu e Mi l es Between Roadealls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 IIIA 1 2 Ope rating Expense Per Capita ....... . .... . ....... . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . 64 III AI3 Ope rating Expense Per Passenger Trip........ . ....... . . .... ..... . . . .... .... . . .... . .... M Ill A 14 Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile ........ ............. ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 IIIA IS Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mile ..... . . . . ................ . .... . . . . . . . . . 64 III A 16 Farebox Recovery Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 III A 17 Vehicle Miles Per Peak Vehi c l e ..................... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 111-AIS Re.venue Hours Per Employee ......... . . ..... . . . ..... ... . . . . . . . . . 64 IIIAI9 Passenger Trips Per Employee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 liiA20 Average Fare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Syslem Total Including Purchased Motorbu IIIA21 A rea Popu lal ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6S 111A22 Passenger Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6S 111/123 V
PAGE 14

FIGURE IllA26 JII A27 lli-A28 lii A29 Ill-A30 111-A31 lll A32 lll-A33 lli -A34 LIST OF FIGURES Vehicles in M 'aximum Service ..... ....... ................ . . . . ............ .... ............. Vehicle Miles Per Capila ......... ......... . .......... .... .... .... . ... .... . ....... Passenger Trips Per Re"enue Mil e .......... . . ..... .... ........ .... .... .... . ..... . .... . Operating Expense Per Capira ....... ........ . ..... .. . . . . . . .... . . . . ....... ... Operating Expe n se Per Passenger Trip .... ........ ...... ....... .... ............ .... .... ......... Operating Expen se Per Revenue M ile ... ..... .... .... . . .... . . ........ .... . ......... .... Farebox Recovery Ratio .................... ..... ..... ............... ........ ... Vehi cle M i les Per Peak Vehicle ........... ........ ... .... . ....... ..... . . ...... . .... . ... Average fare ..... .......... ........................ . . ........... .... . .... ........ . ... Broward T ransit Division PAGE 65 66 66 67 67 67 6 7 67 67 111-B 1 Counly/Service Area l'opu l al i on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 lli B 2 Passenger Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 I II B3 IIIB4 111-85 111-86 lll -B7 111-88 ll l B 9 111-B 10 111-BII 111012 lii B13 111014 111B 15 lll Bl6 111-017 111-B 18 111-B 19 111-020 lllB21 Vehicle M iles n n d Revenue Miles ........... . ....... . ........ . . . ........... .... ............. Total Operating Expens e .......... ....... .... ..... . .... ...... . ............ ......... . . . . Passenger fare R evenues .... . . ........... . ....... .... . ...... . . . . .... .... ............ rotal E ntpl oyces ............ . ....... . ...... . .... . .... . . . ........ .... . .... ..... Vehicles irt Service ... . .......... .... . . .... .... ....... . .... ........... .... . Vehi cle Mih::. s Per Capita ....... ......... ........ . ........ ... . ................ ......... .... Passenger T rips P e r Revenue M ile .................. . .... . .... . ........... ...... .......... . A veragc Age of F ie< I ............ ....... .... . .... ........ .... . . . ....... . . . . . ....... Revenue Miles Beh\een Incidents ........... , ............. . ............... .................. . Revenue M iles Between Rottdcalls . ....... ............... . . . . ............ . ................ Operating Expense Per C apita . . . ....... . .............................. . . .... . ...... . . Operating Expense Per Passenger Tri p ........ ....... . . . . . .... . . . .... ....... .... .... . . Operating Expertse Per R eve n u e M il e ........ ....... .... ......... .......... .................. Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mil e ... ...... . .... . .... . ...... .... . .... .... ..... .... ... Farebox Recovery Ratio ... ...... .......... .... . . . ... ...... . . ..... .... . __ ...... .... .... Vehicle Miles P e r Peak Vehi c l e ... . ... ................... . ... ....... . . . .... . .... Revenue Hours Per E n tployce ... . .................. ...... ............................. . . . . Passenger Trips Per Emp l oyee . . .... .... . . .... .... . . . ..... . . . . ...... . . . . ........ Average Far e .................... ................ ............ . ........... .......... ...... J acksonville Transportation Authority 83 83 83 83 83 84 84 84 84 84 85 8 5 85 85 85 85 8 5 85 85 lli-Cl Counly/Scrv i ce Are, Populalion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . 1 00 lii-C2 Passenger Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 100 lll-C3 Vehicle Miles and Revenu e Miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 xiii

PAGE 15

xiv FIG U RE J fi.C4 lllCS IIIC6 111-Cl 111-CB III C9 lllC I 0 III C II IIICI2 IIICIJ I IICI 4 III CIS IIICI6 IIICI7 111-CIB III.CJ9 IIIC20 IIIC21 LI S T OF FIGURES TotaJ Operating I!JCpc:ns.c: ......................... . ............... ....................... ..... Pass.e,nger Fare Revenues . Total Employees .... Vd:ticles in Maximum Service : Vehicle Miles Per Capita . . . .. Passenger Tr i ps Per Revenu e M ile . Averag e A ge of Flee t ... .... ... . ........ .. . . .. . . . . . . . ....... ... Revenue M i les Bet we e n Incidents .... . ..... . ......... . .............. .... . . ..... ... Re \ tnuc Miles Between Roadcalls .... . .. .. ... ... ..... .... . ...... . . .. . . Opefatin g Exp ense P e r C apita . ............. ........ .... . .................. Operatin g Expense r e r Pas se n ger T rip ........ . .............. , ...... . . . ....... ... O perat i n g Expense Per Revenue Mile , ..... . . . ....... .... ........ .. M.aintcnanc.c Expens e Per Re. v en.ue Mi l e .......................... .............. F arebox R ccove. ry Rotio ................... ........ . ...... Vchidc Mil<$ Per Pnk Vehicle ......................... ............... ......................... Revenue Hours Per Employee . .. . . .. Pas senge r Tri ps Per Employ e e .. A verage Fare . . . . . Hillsborough Area Regiona l Tran sit 111 County/Serv ice Area P o pulation 111-rn 11103 111 11105 111 111 111 111 111 10 11111 111-012 111013 1114 1115 111 111 Passenger Tr ips . . . . V e h icle Miles and Reven ue Miles 0 0 .. Total Operating Expense . 0 Pa.$$engcr Fare R evenues T otl Employtt> . . . . . . . Vehicles in Maximum Service . 0 0 0 0 Vehicle M 'ile:s Per Capita ......... . ..... ... . . . . .... ..... . ............. Passenger Trips Per Reven ue M il e . . ........... . . ....... . ...... ..... Average Age o( F leet . ........... 0 0 Reven u e Miles Betwee n Incidents ... 0 Reven u e Miles Between Roadcalls ...... 0 Operating E-xpen se Per Capita ............ ..... .. .... . . . ............. 0 Opet a ting Expense P er Passenge r Tr i p .............. . .. ... .. , ....... . ....... 0 Operating Expense Per R evenue M ile ......... 0 Maintenance Expense Per R ev e nue Mile .......................... . ............ ..... Farebox Recovery Ratio ............. ................................... . ................... PAGE 100 100 100 100 101 1 0 1 10 I I 0 I 101 102 102 1 0 2 102 102 102 102 102 102 I I I Ill I I I I I I Ill I II Ill 112 112 112 112 112 113 113 113 IIJ 113

PAGE 16

FIGURE 111-01 8 111D I 9 m-D20 m-021 LIST OF FIGURES Veh icle M i les Per Peak Veh i c l e .... . ............. .... ..... . . . ......... . .... .... ....... .. Revenue Hours Per Employee ..... . . . ................... . .... . . . .... . ....... . .... . . Passenger Tri p s Per Employee ....... .............. . . .... . .... . .... . .... ....... .... . . Av eragefilrc ............. .... .... . . ...... ........... . . ...................... . . . . Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority PAGE 113 113 113 I 1 3 111E l Count y / Service Area Popu l ati o n ........... ......... . . ......... . . ... , . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 ll l Passenger Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 m-E3 Vehicle M iles a n d Revenue M i l e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 lll-E4 Total Operating Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 I ll -ES Passenger Far e Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 III-E6 Tota l Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 22 111-EJ Vehicles in Maximum S e rvic e ....... ......... ........ ...... . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . 1 22 IIIE8 V e hicle M i les Per Capita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 lliE 9 Passenger Trips Per Revenue M ile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 111EIO Average Age of Fleet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 !ItEll R evenue Miles Detween Inc i d ents .... . . .......... ......... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 lll-El2 Revenue Miles B etween Roadcalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 IUEI3 Oper ating Expense Per Capita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 4 111EI4 O pe r a ting Expense Per Passenger Trip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 24 111-EIS Operating Ex.pense Per Revenue Mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 H l-rrt6 Maimena nce Expense Per Revenue Mile ........ . . . . ....... . . .......... . , . . . . . . . . 124 1111 7 Farebox Recovery Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Jll1 8 Vehicl e Miles Per Peak Veh icle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 24 UIE 1 9 Reven u e Hours Per Empl o y ee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 l ll -E20 Passenger Trips Per Employee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 111-E21 Average Fare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Lynx (Orlando) 111-Fl 111-1'2 111-FJ III-F4 111F S 111-F6 III-F7 111-FS County/Servic-e Area Population . . ....... ....... .... . ............ ........... . . ...... ... I ) I asscngcr nps . ..... ...... .... .... ............. . .... ....... . . . ... ....... .... . ... Veh icle M i le s Md R e v e nue Miles ....................... ....... . . ..... ....... ........... . . . . Total Operatin g Expense ..... ... . ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... . .... . .... Passenger Fare R evenues ....... .... .... ...... . .... .... . . . . .... ...... .............. . ... Total Empl oyees ........ . ..... .... ........ .... ..... ....... ..................... .... Vehi<:les i n Maximum Service ...... . ............... . ......... .......... ......... .......... Vehicle Miles Per C apit a ........ .... .......... ..... ..... . .... ............ ......... ... ... . . 140 1 4 0 1 40 1 4 0 1 4 0 140 140 141 XV

PAGE 17

XVI FIGURE III-F9 111-FIO 111-FII IIJ.F12 111-FIJ III-FI4 111Fl 5 lli-F16 III-F I 7 lll F18 III-F19 111-F20 IIIF2 1 LIST OF FIGU RES Passenger Trips Per Revenue M ile ............... ..... ...... ......... .... ......... . . Average Age of F l eet ..... , . ... ...... ............. ....... ............. . . . ... Revenue Mile. s Between Incidents ...... ....... . . ......... .... . ... . . ...... ......... . . . Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls ........... ..... .... . . .... . . ......... . . ......... . . . Operatin g Expense Per Capita .......... . . . . . .......... . ... ... .... . . . .......... ..... Opemting Expense Per Passenger Tri p ... . ... ... .... .......... . ........................... . . . Ope.rating Expense Per Rtve nue Mil e ... .... .......... .... . . .... ... ... . . . . ....... ....... . Mai n teJlance Expen se Per Reven u e Mil e . ... ............... . ....... ............................ . Farebox Recovery Rati o ..... . ................. ...... . ........... ........ ........ , . ... Vehicle Miles Per Peak Vehic le .... ...... . .... ........ . . .......... .... .... ........... .... Revenue Hours Per En1 p l oyee ............... .......... . ..... ... ... .. ..... . . ................ Passenger Trips Per Employee . . . . . . . .... .... .... . ..... .... .... .... . ....... ....... . Average Fare ...... .... ........... ............. ........... .... ....... . .... . .... . .. Palm Beach County Transportation Authorit y PAGE 141 141 141 141 142 142 142 142 1 4 2 142 142 142 142 111 0 I Coun t y/Service Area Popu l a tion .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. . . . . .. .. 157 111-02 Pass enger Trips ... . . ......... ... .. ... ... .... .... ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 157 11103 Veh i c l e Miles a nd Revenue M i les . ........ ....... . ......... . ........ . . . . . . I 57 111-04 T o tal Operating Expense . ...... ........ .... .......... ..... . ... . . . . . . .... . , 157 111-05 Passenge r Far e Revenues ................ ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J 57 111 Total Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 57 11107 Vehi
PAGE 18

LIST OF FIGURE S FIGURE Tallahassee Transit 111-H I County/Setvicc An:> P opuluio n 111-112 IIIH3 III-H4 111-HS 111-116 IIIH7 II HIS 111-1-19 111 H I O 111-H II 111-1112 III HI3 III-HI4 Ill-HI; lll-Hl6 IIIHI7 111-H I & IIIHI9 III-H20 lii H21 Passenger Trips .................................. Vehicle M i les Reven u e Miles ... .... ........................... ............................. Total Operating Expcn$C ..... ............................. .... . ........ ............ Passen,gcr Fare Revenues ..... ..... . .............. ..... ...... Tota l E:!npJoyees ...... .. .. . .. ....... ..... Vehi cles in Maximum Service ................... ..... ......... ............ ... ... ... V e h i cle Mil es Pe r Cnpitn . . . . ... .... ... ...... ...... .. . . ....... . ... ........ P asse n ger Ttips Per Reve nue Mile ... ......... ...... ................. ... ......... .... ... Average Age of F l eet ... ........... . ... . .. ........ ................. ........ ..... .. Revenue Miles Bctvfecn lnc.:idcnls .... . ................ ........ ......... . ... .. ....... Revenue Mile s Between Roadcalls ........... .. ... ........... . .... .................... Operating Expense Per C3pltn ....... ...... ..... ..... .. ................. . . ... ...... Operating Expense Per Pnss engcr Trip ......... ......... .. .. ... .............. Operatjng Expense Per Revenue Mile ........... . .......................... ...... , .... Maintenance Per Revenut Mile ........... ... ................................. farebo x Rcc;ovc:ry Racio ........ . ................ ............................................ Vehie:le Mi. les Per Pe3Jc V e hicle ................................. Revenu.c Hours Per Enlp l oyec ........................................ .. ............. Pass
PAGE 19

FIGURE 111-11 4 Jll-115 111-116 111 -117 111-118 111-119 111-120 111-121 LIS T OF FIGURES Operating Expense Per P a ssenger T r i p ... ...... .... ....... . ...... . ....... .... ..... Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile . . .................... ... . . .... ...... ... Maintenance Expense Per Revenue Mit e . ..... ............ ..... ....... ......... ......... .... Farcbox Recovery R atio .... ............. . ..... . ... .... . ...... .... . . ...... ..... Veh i cle M iles Per Pe a k Veh i cle .......... .............................. ... ... ..... . . . .. Revenue Hours Per Employee .............. . ... ............. .............. . .... . . . ... Passenger Trips Per Employee .... ..... ...... ....... . ......... ..... .... . ............ A vcragc Fare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . East Volusi a Transit Auth o rity JH.J 1 County/Service Area Population ........ . ....................... ........ . . ..... .... , ... 111-12 P assenger Trips . ...... . .... .... ................... ....... .... -... . . ........... -.. 111-13 Vehicl e Miles and Revenue Miles .... _ ... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . __ . ___ _ _ _ 111-!4 111-JS 111-16 111-17 111! 8 111! 9 111J I 0 111-JII 111-J 12 111J 13 111J 1 4 111-J 1 5 111!16 111-J 17 111-J18 III-JI9 111-120 111-121 Tolal Operal ing Expense .... .... . . ............ 0 0 0 o Passenge r Fare Revenues ... ....... . ............. .... . . . . . .... .... . ............... T otal EJnpl oyees ............. .. . .......... ....... .... . ...... .... ... ... V e h icles in Maxi mum Service ...... ....................... ....... ............... .... Veh icle Miles Per Capita ........... ...... .............. ........ ...... ............... ..... Passenger 1 'r ips P er Revenue Mile-. ....... . ...... .... .... . , . ..... .......... .. . A vcrage Age of Flee t ........ ..... .... ........... . .. . . .... .... . . . ............. Revenue Miles Betwee n Incidents ...... .. ....... .......... . .... ..... ..... ..... Revenue Miles Octween Roa d calls ........ . ......... .... ............... . . .... . . . . .... Operatin g Expense Per Capita ....... . . ....... .......... . ......... . ........... .. Ope rating Expense P e.r Passeng er T rip . . ........ ............... . .. . ..... ..... ... . . Operating Expense P e r Revenue M ile ... ... ...... ........... ......... .... ......... ..... . ..... Mai nt e nanc e Per Revenue Mile ... ............ ... ..... .. ... .... ... . .... .... , Farcbox Recov ery Rati o ..... .......... . .... . ....... . ......... .... ............. . ..... Vehicle Miles P e r Peak Veh i cl e ..... . . .......... ......... . ..... ... .... ........... Reven u e Hours Per Enlployce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... Passenger Trips Per Employee . . . _ . _ __ . __ _ ... .... ...... ...... .... ...... Average Fare ... . .... . .......... . ............ ........... . . ................. .... . Escambi a C ounty Transit Syst e m 111-K I County/Service A r ea Population ...... .. . . . . _ . _ . ... __ . ..... _ .... ..... . III-K2 Passenger T r ips ......... ....... _ ... _ . . . .... __ . . ..... ..... ........ .. 111-K3 Vehicle Miles and Revenue Mile s ...... ............ ....... . .... . .... .... . . . .......... III-K4 Total Opera ting Expense ... ...... _ _ . __ . _ ... . _ ..... .. __ .. .... .......... xviii PAGE 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 188 188 188 188 188 188 188 189 189 189 189 189 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 199 199 199 199

PAGE 20

VICUR E lli-KS liiK6 m.K7 111-KS IIIK9 111-KIO 111-Kll 111-KI2 111-K I 3 IIIKI4 111-KIS III-KI6 lii-K17 111-K 18 111-K19 111-K20 III-K21 LIST OF FIGURES Passenger Fare Revenues . . . . . . .. . .. . . ..... , .... ......... ..... .. . ... Tocal E1nployees ...... ......... .... .......... ....... . . .................... ....... V h I M S e ac es 1 n t'lx1mum erv1ce ...... . .... .... ..... . .... . ... .. . . ..... , .. , Vehicle Miles Per Capitn ...... ........................... ...................... Pnssengcr Trips Per Revenue Mile ..................... ................................. ...... .. .. Average Age of Flett .... . . .......... .................... .......... , .................... Revc.nue Miles Between Incidents ....... ........................ ............................... M iles Bctwten Ro00calls ............. ............ ...................................... Operating Expense Ptr C3pi1a ....... ....... ................................................... Opctoting Expmse Pnsscn ge r Far e Revenues ... ...................... ........ ....... , ... .. . . . . . . . . . 2 1 6 III L6 To w l Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 liiL7 V ehic les in Muximum Servic e ......... ..... ......... .... . .... ....... . , . . . . . . . . . 216 lllL8 Vehicle Miles P e r Cnpira ........... .... . . .... . . .... ...... . .... ............ , .... . . . 217 lli L9 l'nssenger Trips Per Revenue Mile . . .. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 2 1 7 IIILI O Avcmgc Ageofl' lcct . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 7 lli L II IIILI 2 IIILI ) IIIL 1 4 Ill-L I S ll iLI6 IIILI7 Il l -L I S Revenue Miles B c t \ \ 'Ccn Incidents .... . . . .......... .... .... ...... ........ .......... ... ... Revenu e Miles O et\veen Roadcalls ........ ...... . . ............. .................... ..... Opcmtlng Expense P er C apita ..................... . ....... . ... ....... ............... Opcmtlng E.xpens e Per Passeng e r Trip ... ..... .. ...... .. ....... .... .................. Opcnllina Expen se Per R e v enue M i le ..... .... ..... . ........ . . ..... . .... ...... . ...... Mni ntenanee l!xpense Per Revenue M ile ............ . . ... .... . ...... ........ . . .. , , fnrtbox Rt(:()very Ratio .... ......... . ...... ... ....... ... ........... ....... Vehicl e Miles l 'cr Peak Vehicl e . ...... . ...... .................... .... .... ......... 2t7 217 218 2 1 8 2 1 8 218 2 18 218 xix

PAGE 21

XX FIGURE lff LI9 lllL20 IIH.21 LIST OF FIGURES Revenue Hours Pc::r Empl oyee . ........ .......... . ................. ... .. ... . ........... ... Passenge r Trips Per Employee .... ...... . . .............. ... . . ........... . . . .. . .... Average Fare Sara s ota County Area Transit 111-M I County/Service Area Population lllM2 III M3 IIIM4 lll-MS III M6 III M7 lllM8 lllM9 111-M I O lll M I I lll-M 12 lfi M13 III-M 14 III M 15 lll M 16 JII-MI7 III MI8 lll M19 III-M20 III M21 P I' assenger nps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... .... ......... . . .... . . Vehicle Miles and Reven u e rvtiles ........ . . ....... . .... ... ... . ......... ..... . ...... Total Operating Expense ........ .... . . . . .... ....... ........ .... . .......... . . . ... .. Pass e .nger Fare Revenues ......... . .... .......... ..... ......... .... . . ...... ...... To
PAGE 22

FIGURE 111-NIO IIIN I I 111N 1 2 111N 1 3 111-N 14 lllN 15 lllN l6 111-N I 7 111-NI8 lll NI9 IIIN20 lll N2 1 LIST O F FIGURES Average Age of Fleet ......... ............ ............... . ..... ... . ..... . ....... Revenue M iles Between J n cidenls . .................. . . . . .... ......... . . .... . ........ . Revenue M i l e s Between Roadcalls ...... .......... . .................... .... . .............. . Operatiog Expe-nse Per Capita . . ........ ............. .... ... ..... .... . ................. . Operating Expense Per Passenge r T rip ....... .... ...... . . . .... . ...... ..................... . Opera1ing Expense Per Revenue Mile . .... .................. . .... .... . .................... . Maintenance Expense Per Reve1we Mile ... . .... ... ............ ... . . .... ....... ......... . .... . F'arebox Recovery Ratio .... . . ........ . . ......... ... ....... ....... .......... .......... V e hicle Miles Per Peak Vehicle . .......... ............... . . . ................. . ....... ...... RevenueHours Per E r npl oyee .... ............... ............. .... .............. . . .... ...... Passenger T rips Pe.r Employee . . .... . . .... . ........... . .... .... ....... .... . . . . . . . A vcrage fare ............ . . ...... . ........ . ..... ....... ....... ....... ... ... ..... ... Manatee County Transit PACE 238 2 3 8 238 239 239 2 3 9 239 239 239 239 239 239 lll-01 County/Service Area P opu lation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 111-02 Passenger T r ips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 lll-03 Vehicl e Miles and Revenue M i les . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 4 111-04 Total Operating Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 111-05 Passe nge r Fare Revenues .... ........... ....... .... . ................ .... ......... . . . . . 254 111-06 Total Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 111-07 Vehi cl es in Max imum Servi ce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 111-08 Vehicl e Miles Per Capita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 11109 l,a s se ngcr Trips Per Revenue M i l e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 111-010 Average A ge of F leet .... . . . ..... ... ....... . ... . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 111011 Revenue Miles Between Incidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 5 ll l-012 Revenue Miles Between Roadcalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 111-013 Operating Expense Per Capita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 6 111 014 Opcroting Expense Per P:LSscng.cr Trip . .... ........ .......... .... .... ................... ... . . 256 1111 5 Operating ll xpense Per Reven ue Mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 111-01 6 M aintenance Expense Per Revenu e Mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 1110 1 7 Farebox Recovery Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 lll -018 Veh icle M i l e s Per Peak Vehi cle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 111-019 Revenue Hours Per Employee . . ...... . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 lll-020 Passenger Trips Per Empl oy ee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 lll 021 A veragc Fare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 XXI

PAGE 23

FIGURE LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Smyrna Trai\Sil Sysltm Ill-PI City/SetVice Areo Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26S 111 P 2 Passenger Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26S 111-PJ Vehicle Miles and Revenue Miles .. . . . .. .. .. . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. 26S IIIP4 Toto! Ope rating Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26S IIIPS Passenger Fare Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26S IIIP6 Total Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 III-P7 Vehicles i n Maximum Service . .. . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. . . . .. .. . . . . . .. 265 111 -P8 Vehi cle Miles Per CapitJ ...... ........ ........ .... . . ......... ... ... . ........ ......... . 266 1111'9 Passenger Trips Per Revenue Mil e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 111-PIO Average Ap,e of Fleet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 111-PII R tv cnuc M iles Oe.t\vcen lncidcnls .... ......... . ......... . , ...... . . .. . . . . . . 266 111-Pil Revenue Miles Between Roadcalts ......... .... ... ..... ............ .......... . . . . . . 266 IIIPI) Oper01ing Expense Per Capita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267 III-PI4 Operating Expense Per Pa>S
PAGE 24

FJCUJl lli Q14 111-QIS LIST OF FJCUJlES f'arebox Rec .ovety Ratio ....... ...... ...... ... . . .... .... .... . . ........ . ............. Vehicle M iles Per Peak Vehicle .... . . .... . ............. ....... . ........ .... ....... . . . . Average Fare ...... .......... . ......... . . ... . . .... . . . . ..... ......... . .... Key Wes t Tran.sit Auth ority I' AGE 276 276 276 \H R\ A r ea Pop\lla.t\on . .... . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IIIR2 Passenger T r i p s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Ill-R3 Vehicle M i l e s n d Revenue M iles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 III-R4 Tota l O p era t ing Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 R I> Ill 5 assenger Fare Re"cnues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 III-R6 Total Emplo yees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 llllU V ehicles in Maximum S e rvice ...... . . . ....... ....... . . . .... .... .............. . . . . 291 111-RS Vehicle M iles P
PAGE 25

FIGURE 111S I O Ill -S II 111-SI2 Ill-S 13 III-SI 4 HI-S 15 IIIS I 6 Ill-S 11 HI-S IS HIS I 9 HIS20 11152 1 LIST OF F IGURF-S Average Age of F l eet .......... ... ................ ................ . . .... . . ..... Revenue Miles Between Incide nts .......... . ........ ..... ........ . ........ . . .... . R evenue M i les Betwee n Roadcalls .......... ..... ............................ ......... ..... . O pcnuing Expense Per Capi ta ... .... ...... ........... . .... . ... . ... . .... .. . .... Operating Expense Per Pa ssenger Trip . .... .... ....... ... ................. ........ . ..... Operating Expense Per Rev enue M i l e . ......... . ................... ............... . ...... Maintenance Expense P er Reve-nue Mile .... . . ............ . ................ ......... . ...... Farcbox Recovery R ati o ....... .... ... . ........ ............... ....... . . .......... . . . Vehicle Miles Per Vehicle ...... . ...... ...... . . . ............... , ...... ... Revenue Hour s Per Employee ...... . . o Passenger Trips P er Employee . . ..... . ... ... . .......... .. . .... ........ . ... Average Fare . . .. ............ .... ..... ... ....... ... ...... .... .... . . . . ..... TriCounty Commute r Rail Auth o r it y xxiv JII-T1 County/Serv ice A rea Populatio n ....... . .................... .... ......... ..... ........... . . . 111-T2 Pass enger Trips ............. ... . ..... ....... ... ......... ......... ...... .... III-T 3 Vehicle M iles and Revenue Miles ...... . . ..... .... . . .... .. .... . ........ ...... ...... . 0 IllT 4 Total Operating Expense ... ...... . . . ........... ................ .... . ..... . .... . m-n IIIT6 lii T7 Ill T8 Ill T9 111-TIO Ill-Til III -TI2 IIITI3 III-TI4 111-1'1 5 111-T1 6 Ill Tl7 III T I 8 III-TI9 Passenger Fare. Revenues . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 T otal EJnployces .... ...... ..... ........ .... ... .. ...... ....... ... . Vehicles i n Maximum Service ..... ....... . . .... .... o o o o Vehicle Miles Pe. r C a p ita . .......... . . .... . . . .......... . ...... . .......... . .... ..... Passenger T r i ps P er Re\ e nuc Mil e ... . .......... .... o o o Average Age of Fleet (ye ars) ...... . .... . ... . . .... ....... . .... ...... . . . . ... Opera ting Expense Per Capi ta ..... .. ... .......... ..... . . ...... . ..... . 0 Operati ng Expen se Per Passenger Trip ..... . .... ..... . . . . ...... . ......... .... ... . . Oper ating Expense Per Reve.nue Mil e ..... ....... ..... . . . ........... . . .... .... ....... . Maintenance Expens e Per Revenue Mile .... ................... . . ........ . . .... . . .... ...... Farebox Recovery R atio . ........ ... ...... . ..... ... . ..... ....... .... . . ......... . Vehicl e Mil e s Per Peak V ehicle ...... .... ..... .... ........... ........... . ..... ..... Revenue Hours Per Etnp loyee ... .. . . ................. . ........ .... Passenge r Tr ips P er Empl oyee ... ....... ...... .... . .... ..... ..... . . ........ .... .. ... Average Fare ....... .... ....... .. ............. ....... ................ ....... .... P AGE 317 317 317 318 318 318 3 1 8 318 318 3 1 8 318 318 327 327 327 327 327 327 327 328 328 328 329 329 329 329 329 329 329 329 329

PAGE 26

FOREWORD Under contrac t w ith the Office of Public Transportation Operations, D epa rtmen t of T ransportation, State of Florida, th e Cen ter fo r Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) has conducted a performance evaluation of F lo rida's fixed-rou t e transit systems Th i s report is based on data from federally -r equir e d Section 15 reports, wh i ch are submitted to the Federa l Transit Administration (FT A) fo r each fiscal year by systems receiving Section 9 fund ing FTA, which has required th ese data s inc e 1979, provides extensive documentat ion on how th e data are to be collected and report e d, and requires auditor c e rt ifica t ion of the submi t ted data. Section 15 reports are the best sing l e source of d ata fo r reviewi n g transit syst e m performance because the da t a are s t andardized, unde rg o extensive review, and are the result of a s ub stantia l data collec tion and rep orti ng process by the trans i t sys t ems. Some Section 15 d a ta are us e d by FTA and by s tat es and loca lities for calcu l ating formulae for the a lloc ation of funding to tr ansit systems. As a resu lt the da t a arc ex tr e m ely important to trans i t agencies. This report i s one of two documents p r epared as part of the pe r formance evaluation project. I n addition to this t e clmical memorandum (Part I, Trend Ana ly sis, 1 984-1992), a seco nd teclmica l memo ran du m was prepared (!'art II, Peer Review Analysis, 1992). This is the fif th sta tewi de trans i t evaluation conducted by the Flori da Department of Tra nsportat ion (FOOT) and CUTR. CUTR would l ike t o thank FOOT and each of the individua l transi t systems fo r their coopera t ion and ass i stance in th e prepa ra tion of the memoranda Center for Urban Transportation Research Universiry of South Florida Tq/ep lwn: (813) 974 3120 Project Director: Steven Polzin Projecr Manager : JQfJI R. Rr:y Staff Supporl : Victoria A. Perk William /... Ball Florida Department of Tran sportatio n Office of P u blic Transportation Operations Public Transit Office 605 Suwannee Street Mail Station 26 Tallahassee, Florida 32399() Telephone : (90 4 ) 4 88 7774

PAGE 27

This is a blank page

PAGE 28

1992 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF FLORIDA TRANSIT SYSTEMS PART 1TREND ANALYSIS, 1984-1992 I. I NTRODUCTION Rap i d growt h in F l orida has resulted in increased attention to publ i c trans i t as a pot e ntial so l ution to ever increasing uansportation problems in t h e state. Along with the increased emphasis on pub l i c t ransit comes the necessity t o assess t h e effeetiveness and efficiency of transit systems. F l odda l egis l m i on r e quires the F l o rida Department of Transportation and Flor i da's t ransit systems co d evelop and report performnncc measures. The re-levant F l or i da statutes are noted in Figure J .J. FLORIDA STATUTE 341.041 FLORIDA STATUTE 341.071 FLORIDA STATUTE 341.052 FIGURE 1-1 s 341 041 1990 SUPPLEMENT TO FL' (3} oevaklp publi-sh. and admi nister Slate measures concerning system managemenl. petlo r m a n c a. producli-My. distr i b uliOf\, and satoty ot gova r n mO!ltally owned pvi)Jjc transit systems ... ( 1 ) ... each public trans it provld o t shall estab l ish public uanspatlatkln developme n plan s cons i stent v.ilh l oca l QOV$rOmenl COffipfehensi ve plans {2 ) 'Each public transi t prov ider shall ostabtish p r oduclivity and porfor m onco moasures. which must be approv a o by the depar tment and whic h mus t be se-lected from m eas v r es deve l oped pur:suant to s. 341.0 41 {3). (3} 'Each pv blic uansi l provider shall publ ish i n t he focal newspaper ol i ts area the PIOduc t i vi t y a nd porfom\8nco measwes est a l)t ishe d lor the year .. --J (4) To cemail\ e ti gibto to r ece i ve funding .. ellg lbl e public t rMsil providers must comply whh . s 341 011(1) by J u ly I. 1991. ond .. s. 341.071( 2) by J uly I 1992 . : 3

PAGE 29

Cons is tent with the legisla tion. this report provides an overvi e w of t h e i ndividual and collective performance of florida's fixedroute trans it syste -ms. There are twenty systems that a re included in t h is report, sev enteen of which provide fixedr oute motorbus services. Of t hese seventeen systems, fourteen also offer some t ype of demand -response service either directly or through a contrac t with an outside vendor (this report does not address demandresponse serv i c es) Two of the systems (Metro-Dade Transit Agency and J acksonville Transponation A ut hority) opera t e automated guideway sys t ems (pcoplemover) while a sing l e system (Metr o-Dade) o perates a rapi d rail system. In addition a eommUler rail system is currentl y o pera ting in South Florida (Tri-County Commuter R ail ). Tw o systems (Space Coast Area Transi t in Brevard County and Pasco Area lransp o rt a tion Service ) are unique when compared t o other systems around the state. Space Coast provides demand response and vanpool-based tr ansit services primarily; however, in Oct o be r 1991, the system began using some of its demand r esponse fleet to opera te fixedr oute motorbus services. Pasco Area Transportation Service discont inued fixed-route motorbus service in 1990 and now o nly provides demand -response service. Jlle report is presented in two parts. P a rt l, Trend Analysis, begins with a summary of sta tewi de trends. followed by a conside -ration of the F l orida fixedroute total trend Part I a l so presents the performance tre-nd for each of Florida's fixedroute transit systems over a nine-year time pe riod (1984-1992) A variety of tab ular and graphical dat a are included which portray t he changes in several perfom1ance, effectiveness, and efficiency measures from the years 1984 t o 1992. Appendix A J>rovide. s a list of definitions of the te. n n s used in the re .port. Appen dix B presents a review of the specific sources for data used throughout the analysis. Appendi x C p r ovides an address listing of the F l o rida t r ansit systems, i nc l u ding the names of t he director and Section 15 co nta c t person for each system Part II, Peer Review Anal ysis (separa t ely bound). presents tabular and g ra p hical data C-Ontrasting the pe rformance of Floridas t r ansit sy stems wit h ea c h o ther and with simi lar sys tems from around the coun try for 1992. Appendix A provides a l ist of definitions for t<::rms used in Part II and is i dentica l c o Appe ndix A o f Part I Appendix B p resents a review of t h e sp<."Cific sou rces for data used throughout the anal y sis and is i dentical to Appendix B of Part I. Append ices C and 0 p rovi de a d dr ess listings for t h e F lorid a c ransit sys tems and the peer systems included in the report, respe-Ctively, and are both s i milar in fonnat to Appendix C of Part I. The F l orida l r a nsit systems inch1dcd in this r eport are provided in Figure 1. 4

PAGE 30

FIGUHE 1 2 Florida's Tr:!nsit S y s tems greater than 200 buses 50-200 buses 10-49 buses 1 9 buses other systems Brevar d Space Coast Tronsit System Browo r d Broword Tr a nsit Division E s combio Esco mbi o County Transi t Syst e m Golnes\'l lle Region a l Transit System Hillsbor ough Hillsborough A.teo Regional Transit Jocluonvillc Jacksonville Tronsportotion Au t hority Kqo West Key Transit Atithorlty lokelo.nd Loke!Of'ld Are a Moss Tr a n sit Dist rict Lee Lee Cou nty Transit Authority Mo:notce M o not County T r o nslt Miam i Metro-Dade Transit Agency NewSmymo Smyma Transit S ystem Orlando Lynx Tra nsit P alm Beac h Palm Beoch Cou nty Transportati on Au1hority Pasco Pasco An:o Transit System Pinella-s P inellas Sunc:oost Transit Authority Soros o t o S arasota County A.teo Transit T ollohouee Toii
PAGE 31

A. TBE PURPOSE OF PERFORMANCE REVIEW Since analysis is only one means of evaluating performance and is limited t o thos e aspects included in the analysis, the reader should exercise considerable caution in interpreting t he results. It is p anic u la r ly strong in reviewing cost effectiveness and efficiency; however. it does not report on the extent to which o the r objectives of t he transit author i ty a re being altai ned. For example, the perfom1ance evaluation will not d irectly measure severa l relevant considerations such as passenger satisfac.tion with regard to levels of service, taxpayer and public attitudes towar d the agency employee morale success in a t taining minority hiring or cont r acting goals, quality of planning, contributions to economic deve lopment, air quality improvements, or o the r goals that may be important to the agency. In addition, several aspcc:;ts of quality of arc not measured in performance reviews. These include vehicle clcanJiness and comfort, operator courtesy, ontimc per fonnancc qua l i ty of marketing and passenger informa tio n support and level of satisfaction with hours of operations, frequency of serv i ce, a n d geographic coverage of th e service . In addit io n t O understanding the l imits of this analysis, t he reade. r shou l d use caution in interpreting the meaning of the various measures. The pcrfonnance rcvic w docs not ncc<:Ssarily provide information regarding which aspetls of performance a r e within control of the agency and which measures arc nol. Figure 1 is a schem atic of the factors that ultimately affect uansit agency perfonnance. Performance reviews a.rc a useful and important tool in monitoring and improving transit system perfomnmce However, it should be recognized that the results of trend and peer analyses are onl y a staning point for fully understanding the performance of transit systems. The issues identified as a result of the analyses provide the bo'\Sis for a se. ries of que. s tion s that can lead to an enhanced understanding of the "hows" and whys .. of system per fonnance. 6 MANAGEME11T!STAFF skiJts 4 exptHjMCt! ., rrainillg loadefship morals si1Nic6 dss/gn S8Mc8 quality . FIGURE 1-3 Fattors Affecting Transit Performance LOCAL POUCY OEC/5/0NS land use UJI>an clssign <: parking .. :tbfling SBI'\.'Sce levs/s ,' tafe polk:y : .: .... . .... . . ., ., '$, f' OPERATING ENVIRONME11T donslfy land U$8 pattems li: .. -# ( ... . _., _ ::s ...... . :\ ': .. ; ": ...

PAGE 32

B. PERFORMANCE REVIEW OATA !lASE The major source of data for the performance review is Section 15 repo11s. To receive federal funds. transit properties arc required to repon a vari ety of data in a standardized format, result ing in what is known as a Section 15 report. These reports provide standardized measures of reponing that enable a more accurate comparison of infomla tion between properties Since 1979, when th i s r eporting requireme.nt wns instituted, additional r d i nemcnts in data collection an d r eporting have increased the ac:.curncy and comparability of t h e datiL The data arc for the fiscill year used by each transit autho rity. f-or F l orida properties> the fiscal year runs from October I through Sep!ember 30. For other prope11ies, the fiscal year may be different. For clarification of any d i screpancies, it is recommended that the appropriate t ransit system be contacted to verify data and ide1uify any uniqu e characte ristics of significance. D:tt:l Rcli:lbility All S ection 15 data submiH<.-d to FTA are subject to considerab l e review and va l i dation through manual and automated methods Each re p ort is t horoughly examined to identify err ors, que stions, and inconsistencies ff A identifies problems and requires each reponing agency to respond to these problems before t he l inal report is accepted. T he quality of the data published in FTA 's "National Urb11n Mass Transpor1ation Statistics Secdon 1 5 Annual Report" improves each year as transit systems become m ore familiar with collecting and reponing data and as defin i tions and procedures become more D<.:spite the fact that the data are becoming m o re reliable over time there still remain proble-ms with the quality of the data for s ome transit sysrems. For this study. data were t:'lkcn from published !i\lmrnary reports of Section 1 S filings and from individual Section 1 5 reports provided by t h e tr:msi l for fiscal year 1992. With I he exception of data on the inflation rate, all information was provided by the trans i t systems. CUTR d i d not collect any original data or conduct a n y audits o r onsile analyses of the data or data collection procedures. CUTR did. however, review the data in detail and corr espond with the transit s ystems concerning quest ions o r inconsistencies. This review involved i dentifying irr egu l arities in trends a n d numbers that were believed 10 require (lddition;tl re\ icw and ver ification, such as re\iewing selected ratios n n d data trends to identify changes that were atypical, g iven the overall trends. Additionally> a compl eted system data fil e was provided to each property tOr review and verification. In man y ins1ances, data were changed o r s i gnific:nu modifications we 1e made. In several cas<.'S, data previously submiued to FTA were c hanged to reflect new information or refinement s in definitions and data collection. In some instances, t trulSCI'iption or other errors were d iscovered in the data. In other instances, erroneous dat;l from previous years which could not he corrected were extrapo l ated or estimated to provide the most accur a t e infonmnion possible. The level of atten tio n to data review was consider a bly g reillcr for f lorida properties tha n for peer properties from outside the state. The data used for peer comparison in Part II of this repor1 consisted of data reported for 1992. Since these data more recent, they arc expected to be o f higher q u ality. The absence of t rend data for non f l or ida systems precluded applying mruly of the reasonabl eness tests t o t h e peer data that were applied to t he data of Flor idas transit systems Data Definitions To fully u nderstand the d a t n presente d in thi s report, it is important to understand the definitions of t he terms used i n Section 1 5 doc.uments. I n many instances, t hese definitions differ from i nitial perceptions and may be subject to interpretation. Appendix A provides a detailed list of definitions ror ter m s used by F T A Tile data collec ti o n procedures further speciry exactl y what is being ref e tred 1 0 by a g iven tenn. For example, passenger t r i p .. refers to an indi v idual boarding a uansit veh i cle. 7

PAGE 33

A pe.f'son riding a bus from the comef' to the office takes one passenger trip to work and a second passenger t rip to return home. Likewist, a person who takc. s a bus, transfers to Metror ail. and then transfer s to Metromover would be counted as 1aki ng three passenger trips. In spite of these definitions and c ontin ued refinement s in data collection procedures. there remain some d iscr epancies betwee n systems as to how terms are defined and how information i s collected. Accordingly) caution shoul d be used in interpret ing findings, especially for those variables that are more l ikely co be subject to var iation in definitions Examples include some variation i n the specific definitions of "roadcalls" and "incidents" used by the various properties. I n 1990, the definition f or ''incidents (originally "accide nts") was modified to reflect a change in the classification of unforeseen oceurrcnc.es. Other agenties differ in how empl oyees a r c categorized among administrative. transportation. and maintenance tasks. Still other discrepancies can result from differences in the o r ganizational struc t ure of t he agency and the allocation of re-sponsibili ties among the various governmental entities For example, some transit systems establish their own tn'lnSit police/sccu r ily forces, while other s rely on t h e municipal o r co u n t y law enforcement agencies to prov i de the necessary services. Differences such as this can resutt in a s i gnificant \ariation i n operating expen ses. Nume-rous other more subt\e cost allocation d i f f ere n ces can impact the data. For example. street sweeping and garbage pickup at park-and-ride and other transi t faci l ities may be provided at no cost by a g iven jurisdiction or may be a contrac t or inhouse cost of the transit system. Legal services, comput er services engineer i ng and design support admi nistrative support, and o t he r costs arc onen shared costs that may or may not be accurately allocated between the transit system and a parent government a l body. Ti l e n ational inOation rate. as defined by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all items ( i ncluding commo dities and services) from year to year, was u sed to deflat e cost indicators so that they could be presented i n real terms. From 1984 t hrough 1992, service and labor costs tended to increase at a faster rate than did commodity prices. lllerefore, transit oper:ning expenses, which are predomina ntly comprised of service and labor costs. may he expected to increase somewhat faster than inflati on even if the amount of s ervice p r ovided were not increased. Perform:mce Indicators and Measures The eval\lation measures that a r e used throughout the pe-rformance review are divided into three majo r c-ategories: performance indicator s. effectiveness measures, and efficiency measures. P erformance indicators report the data in the select ed categories that are required by Section 1 5 reporting These tend to be key indi cators of overall transit sys tem perfonnance. Effectiveness measures typ ic-ally refine the data further and indicate t h e extent to which various service r elated goal s are bei ng achieved. For example, passenger t r ips per capita is an indicator of the effectiveness of the agency in meeting transportation needs. Efficiency measures involve reviewing t he level of resoure<:s (labor or cost} required t o achieve a given level of output. It is possible t o h ave v ery efficient service that is not effe c tive or to have highl y effective service t h a t is not efficient. In add i tion. the servi ce can be bot h effic i ent a n d effective or inefficient and ine.fft.-ctive in auaining a given objective. Tile substanti a l amount of dat a avai lable through Sect i on 15 reporting provides an opportunity to develop a large number of measures Set s of performanc e indicatOrs effctt ivcness measures . and efficiency measures have-been selected that are be l ieved to p rovi d e a good rep resentation of overall transi t system perfonnance. Other measures and categof'ization s may be devel oped wit h the same d a t a. Table 1 1 list s the indicators and measures provided in this report for d irectl y ope-rated transit services and also prov ides sub-categories wher e appr opriate The extensive Jist of indicators and measures provides a voluminous amount of da ta. all of which are required t o fully u nderstand the perfon nance of a tra n sit sys tem. 8

PAGE 34

TABLE 1 1 Perrormanc::c Review Indicators and Me-asures D i retUy Operaced Trans it Service-s Performance I ndicators Effectiveness Measures Efficiency Measu res Service Ar e a Popu l ation Service Supply Cost E ffic i ency Vehtele Miles Per C3pita Operating Exp. P er Capita Passenger Trips OperaUn.g Exp Per Peai( Veh icle Passenge r Miles Service Consumption Operat i n g Exp Per Pas s enge r Ttip Passenger Trips Per Capito Operating E:xp. Per Passenger Mile Veh icle Mres Passenger Trips Per Revenue Mil e Operating E-xp, Per Reve flue Mile Rev e nve Mles Passenger Trips Per Re venu e Hour Operat in g Exp. Pet Reven u e Hour Vehicle Hours M3ir'l!enance Exp, Per Revenue Mile Revenu e HoutS Q uali ty o f Service Main !. 8cp. Pe r Exp Route Mites A ve r age Speed Ave rage Age of Flee t ( in years } Operating Ratio s Tota l OperaU n g E.xpens.e N u mbe r of I n ciden t s Fare box Reoov e ry Tota l Oper a tin g Expe n se {1984 $ ) T o t:ll Roadca ll s Local Reve nue Per Operati n g Exp Total M aint e n ance E>cpense Reve n u e Mires Between I ncide nts O p e r ati n g Revenue Per Oper. Exp. Total Maintenance Expense { 1984 $) Reve n u e MiLes Betwee n T ota l Ca p i ta l ExJ>ense Vehicl e Utlliz;lt l o n Availability Veh i c le Miles Per Pea k Vehicl e T ota l local R even u e Reve n u e M i !es Per Rou t e M i le Veh i cl e H o u r s Per Pea ll. Veh icle O per3ting Revenue R even u e M il es P e r Vehicle M ile Passe nger Far e R e venues Revenue Miles Per Tota l V ehicles Revenue Hours P-er To t a l Vehicres TotJ.I Emp l oyees Tran sportation Operating Employees labor Productivity M<'IN\tenMce Emp loyees Reven u e Hou rs Per Employee Ad m inistrloyee Kilowatt H o u rs of Propul s i o n Powe r Tot3 1 Ve h icles Per Admin EmplOyee Energy Utilization Veh ic le M iles Per G allon Veh icle M iles Per K i lowall H o u r Fare Average F are 9

PAGE 35

C TilE IIOI.. E OF PRIVATIZATION Privatitation is becoming increasingly imponant i n the transit industry across t he United States and i n Florida. J n 1984, J\O Florida t ransi t sys tems contrac ted for t he provision of fixed-route motorbus service However, in I 990. six F l o r ida transit systems c o ntracted with t h e private sector to provide some fixed-route service. In 1992. the number of F lo r ida systems con tracting for fixed-route servi ce has declined to only two. The irnponance of privati7.ation as it relates to this report concems t he availa b i lity of data for t hese contractual se-rvices. Many of the measures that can be easily calculated for services that are d irec.t1y-operated cannot be calc.ulated for purc hased motorbus since many perfom\ance indi cators are unava ilable. Table 1 indica t es generally w hat pcrfonnance indicators are available for fixed-route, privatized t ransit as well t hose t h a t can be calculated with these indicators. 1 0 TABLE 1-2 Performance Review lndicaCors and M eas ures l'urchascd Motorbus Transit Service s -Performance Indicators E ffe ctlvenes.$ Measures Effictoncy MCUUft$ Service Area Pop u lali on Service Supply Cost Effi ciency Veh i cle M iles Pe r Capita Operating Exp Per Capi ta P.uson ger Trips Ope rating Exp. Pe r P e ak V e h i cle Passenger M iles Service Consumption Operati n g ExD. Per Passenger Trip Passenge r Tr\'Js Per Capita Ope r ating Exp Per Passenge r Mile Ve h icle Miles P assenger Tfl:>s Per Reven u e Mile Operating Exp, Per Revenue Mite Revenue Miles P a ssenge r Per Reve n u e Hour Ope r ati n g Exp, Per Revenue Hour Ve h icle Ho u r s Revenue H o urs Quality of Sorvlco Ope rating Ratios Ave r age Speed none T ota l Ope r ati n g Expense Total Operat in g E xpenS6 ( 1 984 S) Availability Vehicle U!Ui zatlon none Ve h i cle Miles Per Peak. Vehicle Ve h i c le s Ope r ated i n Ma x Service Ve h icle Hours P e r Peak Ve hiCle A:cvcnuo M il es Per Vehic l e M i le Labor Productivi ty none Energy U tilization n o n e Faro none

PAGE 36

II. STATEWIDE TREND ANALYSIS TI1e statew ide tren d an aly sis provides a summary of the combined perfo r mance of Florida's ttansit systems. The analys i s i s comprised of two sec t ions: (I) statewi de directional trends in key indica t ors and measures, and (2) Florida fixed-r oute total trend The sta t ewide trend ana lysi s prov ides an aggregate measure of t ransit perfo rmance i n Florida A STATEWIDE DIRECrJONAL TRENDS Table II-AI provides a s ummary ofsHltewidc d i rtttiona l trends in key indicators and measures for the time -period from 19?1 to 1 992. Based on the percent c hanges in data for these years. the d ire<.:tional trends illus trate t he curren t direction in which F l oridas trru1sit systems are moving i n v arious areas of performance. T h e tabl e establishes how many sys tems are experiencing an inc rea sing tre nd, decrcnsing tr e n d or no c hange for seleettl oyee) show increasing I r ends for seven and 1 2 -Systems. respe c tively. Another me-asure of empl oyee p r oductivity, passengef tr i ps pef empl oyee, shows a positive lrend for 10 sys t ems II

PAGE 37

12 TABLE IIAI Statewide Directi onal Trends in Key Indicators and Measures, ' Florida Syst er:ns With: ,., ' Inc r easing Ttend I Decreasing Tr end I No Cllange PER FORMANCE INDICATORS County/Service Area Popula1ion 4 14 1 .. .. Passenger Trips 1 1 6 2 Vehicle Miles 14 5 A"'S-0 'j;_ -. "'-"- ..... .. . '' Reven ue M iles 16 3 0 Tol.al Operating Expense 15 4 :' 0 ..... ,_ .. Tolal Opera l in g E.xpen.se (1984 $) 1 0 9 0 Passenger Fare 11 8 0 Tota l Empb yoes 10 8 1 .... Vehicles Available fo r Serv ice 9 3 7 Vehicles Operated in Maxtmum SeNice 9 3 7 EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES Vehi clo M iles Per Capit a 1 4 5 0 ; .. Passe nger T rip s Per Revenue M ile 8 11 0 .. .. -. . Average Age of Aeer 16 3 o .-. 'k: .. Reve n u e Mi tes Between Incid ents 13 5 ,. ':; .. ., ._, Revenue Miie$ Between RoadcaUs 8 1 0 ,, .. EFFICIENCY MEASUR ES Operatin g E:xpense Per Capita 16 3 q Operating Expense Per Paenger Trip 14 5 0 Oper ati n g Expense Per Revenue Mil e 11 8 . o Maintena nce Expe nse Per Revenue Mile 1 0 9 0 F'arebox Recovery Ratio 6 13 -' . < 0 Vehic l e Miles Per Pea): VehiCle 7 12 0 Revenue Hour s Per Employee 12 7 '. 0 Passenger Trips Pe r E mployee 1 0 9 0 .. ',, Average F are 8 11 0 > T his tabl e reflects Syste m Total vends for eaCh agency I n those cases where tho syste m total t rend is u n availa ble (i.e . nla ) the t r e n d f o r d ir ect l y ope ra ted mo t o rb u s o r f o r system tola l excl u d ing p u r c hased motorb u s, is used Trends f o r PCT S are not inc luded due to missing t rend data. 2TRI C trend data a r e u n availab l e fo r t h ese m easu re s

PAGE 38

B. FLORIDA FIXED -ROUTE TOTAL TREND Tables 11-B I duough 11-ll J and Figures 11B 1 through ll -1321 repr esent t he flor ida fixed-route total tre n d in various indic ators and measures excl uding p urc hased motorbus (p r iva tiza t ion ). Similarly, Tables ll-B4 through ll B6 and Figures ll-022throu gh ll -B32 provid e the total trend inc ludin g purchased mo to r bus. As in d i c;ned in the introduction, ind ica tors and measures t hat include privatized services h ave less data available. for that reason, many indie3tors ruld measures cannot lx: report(.-d. The table s provide the florida fixed-route tota l trend from 1987 to 1 992 along with the percent change from the beginning to the end of the time period. Sch..-ctcd indicators a n d measures are also presented graph ica lly il should be noted t hat data for the years 1987 throug h 1989 may not be consistent with the indicator-s and measures pre. se med in v ersions prior to the Apri l 1992 v ersion of this repon. This i s due to the inclusion of Key West Transit Authority beginning wit h t h e April 1992 version lt sho uld also be noted that, in some instances, a system may not be included in the statewide to ta l for a parti c u lar indicator in a particula r year due to the unavnilabil ity of data for that system. Fo r example, i f a system's purchased motol'bus passenger trip data for 1987 i s not available, t hen the tot al (includi1lg purchased motorbus) figure for 1987 passenger tr i ps only include-s the directly operated motorbus data for that system. BeJow is a l isting, of t l 1 c systems with unavail able data and the indicato rs and years for which they are missing the data. Metro-Dade Transit Agency-In the Statewide Total Excluding Purchased Motorbus table, MOTA is m issing incident and r oadcall data for \'
PAGE 39

14 Key Wes l Transit Authority In the Statewi de Total Including Purchased M o t orbus table, KWTA includes only directly opera ted motor bus data for 1987 rc-\"cnue miles and revenue hours s ince purc hase d motorbus data are unavailable. Space Coast Ar e a Transit SPCT began ope r ating fixed-route motorbus service in Octo b e r 1991. As a resu lt, SPCT fixed-route motorbus data have been included in r he statewide total s for 1992. Prior years do not reflect any SPCT data s ince onl y demand-re. sponse and vanpool-based transit s ervices were ope rated p r ev iously. TriCoun'y Commuter Ra" Author\ty S n the S Mew\de T o tal Exdud\ n g Purchased Motorbus table, l'R lC fud c o nsumption, incident, a nd roadtaiJ da t a for 1989, 1990, I 991. 30d I 992 are not available and are therefo r e not incl u d ed

PAGE 40

TA BL EII-Bl Florida T ransit Totals Statewide Totul Performance Indicators Excluding Purchased Motorbus PERFORMANCE INDICA T O R S Service hta Population (000) Passeogtr Trip$ Pa s se n ger Mil es ( 000 ) Veh i c le ( 000 ) i-.; ., '" ,. Revenue M il e s {000) Veh i C l e H ou r s (0oo). ... Revenve Hour s (000) ROut e M iiCI$ <> Total Qper,tin g Expense {000) -,v lOI\tl Opera l i n g E.Jcpense (000 ol 1984 $ ) Tot al M a if'llenance Expe n$0 (000) Tota l Expense ( 000 of 1984 $ } T o t a l Capi!31 l:xpe nso (000) T olallcx:.al Revenue ( 000) . . . . 0pet"3ting Revon u e {000) P e .ssnget Aevenues (000) T01;\ \ Emp\ o)'ees T r ansport.,tiOn Ope taling Emp l oyees Mainhm o n c e Empl oyees Admln i $ 11ative Emplo yees Veh icles fC>I M axi mu m Service Veh i cles ()p e taled I n Ma>dmvm Serv ic:t Spate Ratio Tolal G al l ons Cons1.1med {000) T ota l J!.nergy Consu med (000 o f kwh o u rs) 1987 9, 1 36. 1 2 1 28.8 70 .33 582,685.95 -: 68,846.89 63,133.74 \ 1 4,758.22 4,463.22 / 7,734 .40 $235,5 1 3 1 5 $21 3 144.0Z $ 7 1 717 .06 $54,905.35 $82,611.10 $210.684.31 $67,362.32 $61, 1 04.70
PAGE 41

TABLEU-B2 Florida Transit System Totals Statewide Total Effectiveness Measures Excluding Purchased Motorbus EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 % 1987 SERVICE SUPPlY Vthi d e Miles Per Capi ta 7.54 7 .55 7 .27 7 .51 1.11 9.13 2t. 22% SERVICE CONSUMPTION .. ... . ,. .. '-, .. ,... : ... Passen ger Trips Per Capita 14. 1 1 13.41 13.n 14..2'7 / ... "14.96. _,_ 21.75% ' Passenge r T rips Per Revenue Mi l t 2 .04 1.95 2 .07 2.07 2.13 2.05 0 67% .. .' .-' ,. Passenge r lips Ptt Revenue Hou r 28.S7 27.23 2$.75 28.83 30 .60, 29. $1 3 .23!0. OUAUTY O F SERVICE '" .. Aver age Spee d (RM./R.H ) 14.1 5 13.99 . 1 3 .88 13.93 14.37 .. 2.55% ' AveJtgo AS of Aetl Qn yofrS) 6.23 6.23 6 .7J 6.59 6.90 7.57 21.4&% N u mber ol Acciden t s 3 459 .00 3 3 1 1.00 3,151.00 2,223.00 .. 2 894.00 1 5.93% ' -> .<.-: To{al Roadealls 22,709 .00 1 9,331.00 18,249.00 1 7 ,341.00 1 9,532 .00 22, 381 .00 1,44% I-24 .15 "' . .. ?' Revenue Miles Between Accidents (000 } 18.25 19.56 20 94 31 .16 24 .89 i Revenue Miles Betwee n Roadcafl$ (000) 2.78 3.35 3.62 3 .99 3.58 3.23 1 6 .32% AVAILAB1LITY ... ._. ,-; Re\lenue MUss Ptt P.oute MHe (CXlO} 8 .16 8 26 '. 7.61 7,90' 7 .47 '7,23 .. 11. 48% 16

PAGE 42

TABLEIIB3 Florida Tmnsit System Tot:ds Statewide Total Efficiency M eas ures Excluding Purchased Motor bu s EFFICIENCY MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 %Chango 1 987 COS T E fFICIE NCY Operating Expe nse P;r Capita $25.78 $25.89 $26.71 $28.90 $30.79 $36.90 4 3 1 4% Operat i n g Expense Per Pe-ak Veh icle (000} $175.36 $ 178.46 $191 .75 $207.20 $210.90 $209.53 1 9.48% . Opttral i n g Expense Per P assenge r 'frip $1.83 $ 1.93 $1.94 $2-03 $ 2.()6 $2.15 1 7.57% Operat i n g Exp ense Per P assenge r Mile $0.40 $0.43 $0.43 $0.4 1 $0.42 $0.41 OpCratif'!9 Expense Per R e v enue Milo $3.73. $3.76 $4.02 $4.19 $4.38 $4.4 1 1 8 .35% Operat ing Ex pense P e r R evenue Hovr $52.77 $52.57 $55.77 $58.40 $62.96 $ 5 4 .04 21 .37% Mai nte n ance s o .Pet Mite : $1.1-4 St.01 $ 1 .04 $ 1.14 St.t9 $1.21 6.22% Mai ntenance Exp. Per Op e r ating Exp 30.4 5% 26.90% 25.86% 27.22% 27 24% 2 7 33% -10.25% OP ERATING RATIOS Far ebox Recovery ... 25.95% 27.39% 26.28% 28.81% 28.4 6% 28. 33'li. 9 .19'li. l ocal Revenu e P e r Operating Elcpenso 89.46% 90.89% 87.28% 85.98% 85.64% 8 5 .51% -4.4 1 % Oper atin g Revonuo Por Operating E.Jtpense 2ll.60% 30 .6t% 29-03% 29.12% 31.1&% 31.36% 9 63'li. VEHICLE UTILIZATION Vehlole Miles P8r Peak Veh iele (000) 51.26 52.04 52.20 53.83 52.7 9 51.87 1.19% V e h icl e Ho u r s Pef Pe a k (000} 3 5 4 3.61 3.63 3.79 3 .85 3 .61 1 .82% Reve oue Miles Pet Veh icle Mit es 0.92 0.91 0.91 0 .92 0 .91 0 .91 0 2 3% Revenue Mit es Per Tota l Veh i c l es (000} 35.65 37. 8 1 36.62 38.18 38.17 3 7.52 5.25% Revenue Ho-urs Per T o t al Vehic l es (000) 2 .52 2.70 2 64 2 .74 2 .66 2 .59 2 .63% lABOR PRODUCTIVITY Revenu e Per E mployee (000) 0 .90 0.98 0.95 1.02 1.02 1.05 l8. 93'li. Passenger T t ips Pe r Employee (000) 25.91 26.12 2 7.26 29.4 5 3 1.1 1 31.27 20 .7 2 % ENERGY UTILIZATION Veh icl e Mitos Per Gallon 3.69 3.87 3.98 4.02 4 .01 3 .91 5 .90% FARE A vetage F ar e $0. 47 S0. 53 50.51 $0.54 S0.59 5 0 .61 28.37% 17

PAGE 43

1 8 STATEWIDE TOTAL EXCLUDING PURCHASED MOTORBUS Figure 11 81 County/Service Area Population (000) 12.ooo..--,--,-..--,--,-..--,----, I I I .ooot-+ I F F 6,ooo l I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I Performance Indi cators 1SO,OOO 120,000 90,000 60,000 30,000 0 Figure 11482 P assenger Trips (000) ---n .. ,,.s n u tur ''" '"' 1 m , t Ut ,,... ,,.s "" tnt nn "" 1 no , nn F i gure 11 Vehicle Miles and Revenue M ile s 80.000 0 I I I I ';-. ..J----.J .....--. I 1-' ............. --t--,...--60, 000 40, 000 --20,000 . --0 Figure 11 84 Tota l Operating Expens e $400,000 -. ,.,. $300 ,000 $200,000 _, ...... $100,000 -......... ., ... ,) so I $100,000 -$80,000 $60,000 --$40 000 '--$20.000 so Figure 11 Passenge r Fare Revenues (000) ...... -:t'.lt4 ,.s ,,., ,,, ,,,. ' tttt nu U84 UIS 1 H 6 19t1 t9 U t 9 U 19to 19't1 199! ,,_.. t9U 1 m '"'' n u ' ''"' u n ttn F i gu r e 11 Total Emp l oyees 6 0001 I I I I I I I I .oool I I I I I I I I 2.oool-l I I I I I I I o I I I ''" '"s nu nn tnt un ntO ' un Figure 1187 Veh ides in Maximum Service 2.000 I 6 ---- -. 1,600 1.200 800 400 0 ,"" '"s ''*' Ut7 ,,.. ' tt ttto , un

PAGE 44

10. 0 8.0 6 0 4 0 2.0 o.o STATEWIDE TOTAL EXCLUDING PURCHASED MOTORBUS Figure 11-BS Veh i cle Miles Per Capita -'IT I_ -1 -Effe c tiveness Measures J/-1 rF igure 119 Passenger T rips Per Revenue Mile :J I !::J: 1. .. 1 I J J .J=EE1 I 0 1 I 1.o I I I I I l I o.sl-1 I I ; I I o.o -1---l I 1-1-1 I I U84 IUS tta6 191) 19U tt" U90 tttt 1992 tnt uas au 11u t m '""' '"o wu uu Figure 11811 8.0 6.0 4.0 2 .0 0 0 Fig ure 11 Average Age of Fleet {years) I I / .------+( "'"; '""'""'' .. ::2 I i==t .-... l 19U IUS 1U6 tUJ t'U ,,., 19i
PAGE 45

20 STATEWIDE TOTAL EXCLUD I NG PURCHASED M OTOR BUS FigureiiB13 Op e rating Expense Per Capita ::::.11 I I I LFR s.:..L I U I I I l!IA IUS 19t6 t9t1 tl 1tl9 19to 1991 1992 F igure 11816 Mai ntenance Exp ense Per Revenue Mile ::.::. rmt w I J $0.90 1 ,. I S0.60 S0.30 L_ I ...... -' $0.00 19M IUS 1916 1U7 tnt 19U IHO lttl ltU Figure 11 819 Revenue Hours Per Employee ':::r1 J kl 11 ---; 600 I 300 ---H 0 1n4 19tS 19U 1,.7 .. l!U 1910 1"1 1"2 Efficiency Measures Figure 11-81 4 O p e rating Expense Per Passenger Tri p $2. 50 52.00 I S1.SD $1.00 --so.so I so.oo -I-1984 19&S "" 1917 Uta 19U 1990 1991 1 991 Figure 11817 Farebox Recovery Ratio lN: I I I I I I I I >o% t-1 I 1-l-1 1011 l I I 1-1 Dill I I I I I I I I 1t84 ttJS 19t6 1H1 19U ttU 1 m '"' '"2 40,000 30,000 20,000 10.000 0 Figure 11 Passenger Trips Per Employee . ,,., nn 19n 1n1 .. ,,., 1no ,,, 1 n 2 Figure 11815 Operating b:pense Per Revenue Mile ss.oo $4.00 $1.00 ...... $2.00 1 -$1 .00 $0.00 -''" 1985 '*' ,,., uaa uu nto "" un Figure 11818 Vehide Miles Per Peak Vehicle 60 ,000 40,000 20,000 0 1984 IUS 1H6 1H1 UU n n ln>O 1"1 so.ao $0.60 $ 0.40 $0. 20 ,,_ so.oo Figur& 11 Average Fare .... -'"' l!l$ ,,., 1!$7 .. 19$9 1990 ,,, ,,l

PAGE 46

TADLEII-D4 Florida Transit System Totals Statewide 'totall'eformance Indicators Including Purchased Motorbus PERFORMANCE IND ICATORS 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 % 1987-19 2 Servioe Mea Population ( 000) 9 ,136 .12 9,400.55 9,930.00 1 0,051.14 9, 944 .65 8 .659. 66 5.22% Pass-enger Trips {000) 129, 119.80 1 26,754 .54 1 40,798 .39 1.48,766.95 1 50 394 .91 150,1 67.77 16.30 % Pagse nger M iles (000) 590. 289.45 578.296.22 639,886.72 726 941.98 743 097 .69 760,755 .40 32 .27% Vehicle Miles ( 000) ,._, 69 1 26.42 72,203.62 75,836.70 79,762 .30 78,347 .26 81. 2 59.92 1 7 .55% Reve n ue Miles (000) 63 .245.28 6 5 760.03 68,854.32 72 564 .58 7 1 ,446.29 74,1$4.48 17. 26% Vehicle Hours (000) ,.;... 4 774 .3 0 4 981 .94 .. 5,261 .08 5 599.56 5,440 .08 5,668.16 18.72% Reve n u e Hour s (000) 4 ,468. 6 1 4,661.22 4,957.69 5,221.26 4,9 7 0 .61 5 1 3 1.43 14.83% Ro' ute Mil&.$ .. ,>: nja I I nla I nfa. nja Total Operatin g Expense ( 000 ) $245 ,153 .46 $270,663.10 $298,689 .07 $309 864 .97 $324 ,71$ 42 37.49"% Total Opera t ing Expense (000 o f 1984 $) $2 13 ,783.94 $213 ,881 .41 $226,455 .40 $237 90a.46 $233 482.<2 $234,439 27 9.66% Total M a it'ltcnaneo ( 000 ) nla I n j a I nja nfa nja Totl Maintenance Expense (000 of 1984 $} nja I nja nja n1a nfa Total Capit a l Expense (000) n1a I nja nla nja nfa n j a Loe.al Reve-Oue _(O'JO) ' nl nfa nja nla nja nfa nja Ope rating Revenue (000) nl I nja nla I ., nja Passenger Fato Revenues {000) nla nl nja nla n 1 a nl n f a Total Employees nla n j a nla nja nf a n j a T ransportatlon Employoos I I nla nja I nfa Maintenatlce Employees n 1a I n j a I n1a nf a n f a Adm l n isltative E m pSoyees I I nja nja nla I nfa Ve.hieras Available tor Maxi mum Service I .,. I nla n j a I I Vehicles Ope r ated i n Maxi mu m 877.00 1 392 .00 1,47 2 .00 1 ,503.00 1 492.00 1 810.00 1 06,39% Spare Ratio n l a n1a nja n j a I nfa nla r otal G:diOO$ Coosvmed (000) nla .,. I nla n1a n{a n j a T ota l Energy Ccnsumed (000 o f kwho u r s) I -------.,. nja nla nla nl nla 21

PAGE 47

22 TABLEUBS Florida Transit System Totals Statewide Total Effcclivcncss h-feasurcs Including Purc hascd Motorbus EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY VehiCle MHet Pe r Cap ita SERVICE CONSUMPTION Passenge r T r i ps Per Capita Passenge r Trips Per Revenue Mile Passenger T r ips Per Revenue Hour QUALITY OF SERVICE Average Speed (RM,IRH ) Average Age of Aeel (In years ) Number of Accidents Total Aoadcalls Revenue Milea Between Accidents (000) Revenue Miles Betvfeen Roadealls (000) AVAltABI LITY P4venue Mi le; Pet Route {COO) 1987 ' 7.57 14, 13 2.04 28.89 14.15 n/a .,. nfa .,. nta I 1988 ........ 7.68 13.48 1.93 27.08 ' 14-05 I I nja I I .,. 1989 . .. 7.64 14.18 2.04 28..40 13.89 n/a n/a nfa n/a nja .,. 1990 .... -." < ' 7 ,94'. 14 .80 2 .0 5 28.49 13.90: nja I nla I I 1991 1992 %Change 1987 ... .,.. ., ,... I .,,,..,, P' -.'" ,. ,, __ ,. __ "$ I ... .... _, ; """' .... v- ::t',7 68'" ':"' '24.02% : is.t2 .1 i ',22.70% 2 11 I 30,26 2.02 29:26 .(),82" {28% I 't; 14.37 :.; ) 2 .12% ' .. ''"" .. "'' ' nja nja nfa I , n/a I nl nja I nfa "n/a lt"" .,. nla nfa I I I I I '' ' I 'kk n a ., . n a ;.. ... '.nja .... 'n/a

PAGE 48

TADLEII -D6 Florida Transit System Totals Statewide Total Efficiency Measures Including Purchased Motorbus EFFICIE NCY MEASURES 1987 19/lll 1989 1990 1991 1992 % 1987 1992 COST F.FFICIENCY Operati ng Expenst. Pe( C3pita $25.86 $26.0 8 $31.16 $37 .50 4S .GS% Opttral ing Expense Per Peak Vehic l e {000) $269.35 $176. 1 2 $ 1 83.87 $198. 7 3 $207 .68 $i79.43 38% Opotaling Per PaSse n ge r Trip .. $1.83 $ 1 .93 $1.92 $2. 01 $2.06 $2. 1 6 1 8.22% Opera1 ing Expense Pe r P assenge r Mil e SOAO $0.43 $0.42 S0.41 $0.42 $ 0 .42 3 9 5 % Operat i ng B
PAGE 49

24 STATEWIDE TOTAL INCLUDING PURCHASED MOTORBUS figure 11 822 County'/Service Area Populalion (000) ::.OJ 1:1 I bJ I 6.000 3,000 0 1!$4 IUS "" ttt) tna ltlt 1tJO 1H1 1991 100,000 8<),000 60 ,000 40,000 20,000 0 Performance -lndi tatars 160 ,000 I 120,000 I 80,000 40,000 -0 ----Figure 11--823 Passenger Trips (000) I 1 ...... --------, -----1tt4 19U ,,, t tt1 tttt tnt 1UO tH1 19tl Figure 11 Vehide M i les and Revenue Miles .... .:--.:--. --' .. -...... I Miititml ----.oe"'ol!!l(l)l;q IAi IUS 1916 ttl? lUI 19U ttto tstt tH2 Figure 11 825 Total Operating Expense S400,000 S300,000 $200,000 .... r --. -i-----------!""'! 5100,000 - t'$-ll) 1-so l'J&4 IUS 1 U 6 1tll tttf 19$9 tm 1'91 2.000 1,600 1,200 800 400 0 Figure 11 Vehicles in Maximum Servi c e -- ------- ----l.( --'hi>C ... qw.-.d l j_ t '"" tns "" "" '"' ,., '"o ,,, un

PAGE 50

STATEWIDE TOTAL INCLUDING PURC H ASED MOTORBUS 10.0 8 0 6 0 4.0 2 0 0.0 Effectiveness Measures F igure 11 827 Vehicle Miles Per Capita r -..-::::: I -: -L -V-,--;;-; lU., ''&S 11-'4 lUl \tU \nt 1'1'0 199\ ,,, Figure 11 Passenger Trips Per Revenue Mil e 1.5 -1-1-1 I I 1-1-' 1. 0 +-I I o 5 + 1 1 1-H-f---0.01--ltnt un nu '"' .,., 1nt ,,o ,,, ltU 25

PAGE 51

26 ST A TE WIDE TOTA L IN C LUDING PUR C HASED MOTORBU S S 40.00 $30 .00 $20.00 $10.00 s.a.oo F igu r e 11-829 Operat ing Expense Per <:a pita ""' ' " .. .. u u un ,,., "" '"t Figure 11831 Operating Expense Per Revenue Mile ss.ool I I I I I I I l I I ) 1 I S J .oo, ,Ill sz.oo1 I I I I I I I I s o .oo I I I I I I I I I so.ool I I I I I I I I ttn ,,.. ' u .. uu uto '"' u n Ernciency Measures Figure ll-830 Operating bpenu Per Pa.ssenger Tr i p $2.50 Sl.OO ::: i""' S1.SO $1.00 so. so so.oo lN4 1tU UM 1Jt1 ltU: lJU 1tt0 ' 1ttl Figure 113 2 Vthlde Miles Per P eak Vehicle "'000 ........ 4Q,OOO zo.ooo 0 1----I -1tl4 1tll u .. 1tt1 1 911 1Ht tttO tt91 1tU

PAGE 52

STATEWIDE TREND SUMMARY It i s important to not e that s tatewide trends are significantly impacted by t he performtuu:e of Metro-Dade Transit since. in 1992 t his s y stem comprised approximatel y 37 percent of statewide serv i ce miles and 4 8 percent of r i d ership Service area population de<;rcascd 13 percent from 1991 to 1992. This d e cline resulted from a change in t h e definition of t his ind i c a to r during this time. In 1991 and prior years. county populati on was use.d as a proxy for sel'vi ce area population. However in 1992, service area p opulation data were provided by each of the systems in their Section IS. reports, so these data were u sed inste.ad. tbe numbe r of passenger t rips on Flor i d a's transit systems remained relati vely s t able from 1991 t o 1992. Sinc e 1989, total statewide r i dership has exhibit ed cons i stent growth ; however. it is evi d ent t ha t Hurricane Andrew had an impact on t his particular indicator during the 1992 fisca l year. n1e hurricane, w h ich h i t Dade County on August 24. 1992, caused service int erruptions on all of Metro-Dade Transit's modes for sever al days. Thes e interruptio n s resulted i n a one percent decline in Metro-Oades system total ridership from 1991 to 1992. The number of servi ce miles provided increase-d nearly 4 percent from 1991 ro 1992. Statewide operating expense increase d 5 percent from 1991 to 1992 JnOa tio n was 4.2 percent duriog this time pe r iod. 111e number of re"enue m i les betwec. n roadcalls (reliabi lity) decreased 10 perc-ent from 1991 t o 1992. The number of revenue miles between incide nt s (safe t y) increased 3 percent from 1991 to J 992. Operating expense per passenger tril> increased from $2.06 in 19 91 to $2.16 i n 1992. a n increase of 5 per cent. Operati n g expense pe r rcvcm1e mile i ncrease-d from $4.34 i n 1991 to $4.38 i n 1992 . 110 incrcnse of 1 percent. The a v e rage fare p.er passenger trip for florida transit systems increased from 5 9 cents in 199 1 to 6 1 cems in 1992, an i n crease of 4 percent. 27

PAGE 53

This is a blank page

PAGE 54

Ill. SYSTEMIlYSY STEM TREND ANALYSIS n lcrc m e three basi c organi uu i o n a l st m cturc s under which Florida tran s i t syst ems c u rr entl y operate : six independent atllhoritics, ten cotmtyaffil i alcd sy s te ms, and four city-Mfi l i tttcd sys tems. All or the sys tems ;trc gove rned by s o me type of Ooard of D i rectors o r Commissio1l. l11e Doard of Directors foe i ndependent a ut horities a r c typict lly comprised of appointed m embers representing di ff ercrll crtli tics within t he service a rea. Altcrnati\'e l y, t he gover n ing bodi es for co u nty-affiliate d S>stcms and city affil i a t c d systems arc c ompr i sed or membe r s f rom the c oumy commi s sions and cit y co\ m cils r espectively. A S lllnm ary o f org;miz..11 i o nal structures by system is provi ded i n Table Ill I. Tttblc 111 s umnK lrizcs the variOu s mode. s o p er a ted by ench F l orid:1 sys t e m A majority of c h c systems offer fixedr o u t e m oto rbu s serv i c e as well : l s s ome t y p e or dema n d -rtSpOilSC servic e. I n addit i on. Mctro-Ondc T r a nsi t Agency provide s rapid rail and automated g u i deway trans i t serv i ces Jackso nville Tmn sportnt i on Authorit y b cg:m op e r atin g its gu i d ew a y trnnsi t system in J une 1 989. Tri-Co unty Commuter Rail began operati n g i n J(lnuary 1 989 as well. Each Flur i d a trttn sit syst e m thnt p rovides fixed-r oute servi c e is inclu tkd i n the sys temby-system t r e n d ;mnlysis. A brief sys t e m profil e i s p r ovid e d f o r each -System pr ior to the presentation o f the trend data. Tab l es arc the n p rovi ded which i nclude perfonnomct indicators, cffettivtnc.ss m easure s and effic i ency S 1 )cciftc c omments ilbout the d;na o r m o dific a t i ons tha t wc.re made to the are nlso prov i ded Key indi c ators a n d me.,smcs nrc t hen i llustrate d A t the conclus i o n of t -ach sys t e m sec t i On, C(umnents a r e p rO\'id c d t o idcnti C y and e x plain major c h anges i n the pcr C ormnnc c A m :tio r chan g e i s a ten pcrctllt ( 10%) i n c r ease or decrease in a performance indic:. a t o r f ro m 1991 t o 1992. for Flor ida' s transit systems us e d thr o ughout the syste m-bys ystem trend analys i s arc provided in T a ble 111-3. h l some c:. ases. the .conventiona l abbrcvii\tio n s were not used i n o r de r to ach i eve gmphical consistency. One c h ange i n abbreviation s h ou l d be noted D u e t o the na m e change r o r Orlm u .lo's tnm si t sys t e m from Tr i Comu y Tri'lnsit t o L,ynx T r Msit, t he sy st em s abbrevi ation has be e n ch;mged to LYN X This abbreviation d i ffers f rom the one u sed in t he previou s t c c n d and p eer r e p o rts (OTC T ) It sho u l d be n o ted t h a t there h a s been a c h:mgc in the definitio n of the s erv i c e populat i o n indicntor beginn i ng in 1992. I n l99 l a n d prior years c ounty p op u lati on used as a p roxy f or service a rea p opu louion. However. ill 1992, t h e Fcdeml T au1sit Admi n i st rmion bcga1 1 requiring the p rovi s i o n or sccvicc a rc;l J )Opulnti on da ltl by each of the s ystems i n the ir S e ctio n 15 r epor t s As i\ r es u lt. these : l r C the d:'ll: t t h oll arc n ow in the t fcmJ analysi s tilb! e s
PAGE 55

TABLE 111-1 Organizational Struc: t ure.s of F l o r ida Transit Systems I SYSTEM II COUNTY II C ITY I AUTHORITY Metro--Dade Transi t Agency .J B r ow a rd Transit Divi sion .J Jack s o nville T r ansportation Authority .J Hillsboro u gh Area Reg i onal TranSit ... .. ' f"-!"c >' Pin elfas Sunco ast Transit Authority .J Lynx {Or1an do) .J Pal m Be ach County Transportation Autho r i ty .J Tallahassee T ransit .J R e giona l Ttans l t Syste m (G a inesville) .J Eut Vo l usia TraMit Authori ty .J ,, Escambia County T ransit Syste m .J Lee C o u n ty T r an s i t AuthO r ity .J S arasota County A r ea Trans i t .J L akeland Area Man Transi t D i strict -1 Manatee County T ransit .J Smyma Transit System Pasco Area Transportation Service .J Key Wes t Transit Authority .J S p a c e C oas t A r ea T r an s i t ( B reva r d County) .J Tri County Commuter Rai l Authority v 30

PAGE 56

I ' TABLE 111-2 Modes Opcrared by Florida Transil Sysrems ( 1 992) SYSTEM Metro-Dado Transit Agency Broward Transit Div i sion J acksonville Transport01Uon Authori ty Hillsborough Area Regional Transit P inellas Sunco.a st Transi t A u t hority Lynx (Orlando) Palm Beach County Transportation Authority .. Tall aha ssee Transit Region al Transit System (G;:,inesvllle} East Volusia Transit Auth ority scambia County Tr<'lnsit System Le e County T ransit Authori ty Sa rasota Co un ty Area Transit Lakeland Area Mass Transit District Manatee County T ransit Smyrna Transit System Pasco Area Transporta t i o n Serv ice Key West Transit Authori ty Coast Area Trans i t (Brevard Coun ty) T ri-Cou n ty Commuter Rail Author i ty KEY: MB flXedro u te moto r b u s CR commu ter rail RR r apid rail I I MB I I CR I I RR v v .. v v v v v v v v v v v v v v AG -automated g u ideway DR d e mandresponse I I AG I I OR I v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v 3 I

PAGE 57

TABLE Jll-3 Abbrcvi:ttions for Florida Transit Systems I ABB REVIA nON I I S Y S TEM I M OTA Metro..Oade Transit Agen c y Transit Divis i on ) ., BRO W JXTA Jaeksc>nvllle Transportation Authority HART .. Hillsborough Area Regional Transit I .. PSTA Pinellas Suncoast Tra n sit Authority LYNX Lyn x Transit (Orlando) P BCT Palm Beach County Transportation Authority TAL T Taltahasseo Tl'3nsit ARTS Regional T r ansit System (Gaioosville) ,, : VOLT East Votusia Transit Authority ' ECTS E&ea m b i a County T r a nsit System LCTS Lee Cou nty Transit A uthority .. SCAT Sa r a sota C ounty A rea Trans i t LAMT lakeland Area Mass Transit D istrict MANC Manatee County T r ansit S M TS Smyrna Transit System ' PCT S Pas<:o Area Transporta ti on Serv i ce KWTA Key West T rans i t Auth ority < SPCT Space Cc>ast A rea Tr.ms i t (Brevar d C ounty) TRIC Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority 32

PAGE 58

A. METRO-DADE TRANSIT AGENCY SYSTEM PROFILE Organit..ational Structure-Metr o-Dade Tran sit Agency is a dep.utment of Dade County, which i s charged with th e operation of a unified public transit syster'l), The agency was created on October 28, 1986, a result of the restructuring of t h e f anner Metropolitan Dade County Transportatio n Administrati o n MOTA is managed by a Dircc lor by a.nd directly responsibl e to the County Manager. Tite Direc tor is respon sible for the managemenr, constmcli on and operation of Metrorail, Metrobus, Metr omover, and Paratrnnsit services Go'ternine, Body :.nd Composition .. MOTA is governed by Dade County which is, in effect, a super municipali t y with governmental powers effective i n the 26 cities in t he county and the unincorporated areas. Dade County has a two-tier, commission mam gcr, t ype of government The Board of County Commissioners is comprised of thirteen commissi oners, o ne of whom serves as t he Cha innan. Their tcmt of office is four ye.ars. The County Manager is currently appointed by the Boatd of Courtty Commissioners. In however, the Executhe Mayor will a ppoint the County Manager Sel'vice MOTA operates w i t hin the gt
PAGE 59

34 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Service Area PopuiatiM (000) Setvice Area S k e {$Quare miles) Passenger Trips (000) P3ssenger Miles (000) Vehicle M i les (000) Revenue M i les (000) Vehicle Hours (000) Reven u e Hours (000) Route Milles Tolal O"erating E:xpensc {000) Tota l Qper.a ling Expense (000 of 1984 S} Total M a intenance Expense (000) T ota l Exp. (000 of 1984 $) Total I Expe n se (000} Total Lot-31 Revenue (00 0 } Ope r ating Reven ue (000) P assenger Fare Revenues (000) Total Empioyees ftansportation Oporaling Employees Maintenance Empl oyees Admini strative Employeu Vehicle$ Avail3ble for Maximum Service Vehicles. Opetated i n Maximum Service $f);He Ratio Total Fuel Consumed (000 of gallon$) Tot31 Energy Ct----, .:;;5os.oo f3 .66% _('6,552.68 n/a %Change 1987 74% "' -6 12% \ .57% 11 26% 13.36% 18 20% 10. 75% 9 .19% 14. 17% -8 94 % 8 37% -26.91% -49 .55% 3.46% 37.96% 44.14% 4 .50% .42% .54% 1 0.JI7% 10.60% 29.82%' n/a 1.37% n/a

PAGE 60

PERFORMAN C E I NDICATORS Service Atea (000) :> Servic e Area Site ($quare m iles) Pauenger Trips (000) ''-. P assenger Mile s ( 000 ) Voh ;c!e MUes { 0 00} Reven u e M iles {000} VElhide Hours (000} ,,... Revenu e Hours (000} Route Mi!e s Total Operating Expe nse ( 000 ) Tot;a l Operal i n g Expense (000 o f 1964 $) Total Maintenance (000} Total Maint8n a nce Expense (000 of 1984 S } T o t a l Cap?.a l ( 000 ) Total Loeal Reve nue (000) ,, Revenu e (00 0 ) P a sse ngor Fare Revenue-s (000) Tolal employee s Transpc>rt31 i o n Operali n g Emp loyee s Mai n t e n a n c e E m ployees Adm in i.Sifa tWe Employees Veh icles Availabl e for M3ximu m S ervi ce Vehicles Ope r Tota l Gall ons To t 3 1 E n ergy Consumed (000 o f kw.hours) TABLE lll-A2 M e tro-Dade T ransit Agency P u rchased Motorbus Performance Indicator s 1987 1988 1 9 89 1990 1.802.40 1,838.20 1,873.08 1,9 37 .09 nla n/a nla n /o 166. 9 7 5 3 7 .57 .. 3 ,932.18 4 6 0 4.19 1289 .99 6 ,305.94 1 5,589.90 17,283.87 . 146.47 1.116.36 3 160. 1 7 124 0 4 919.82 2 .547.71 2.508.2 3 8 .78 5 6 .14 205.68 194.62 7 4 5 46. 5 1 174.96 168 2 0 232.90 232 .90 301.20 413.20 $523.49 $1,543.73 $4 ,281.43 $5,146 .60 $473.77 $1 ,346.81 S3,58l.1 4 $4,099 3 1 n/a nl a nla nlo nra n/a nl a n/a n / a n/a nla n / a $523.49 $1 54 3 .73 $4 281.43 $5.146.60 $72 .97 $37 4 ,$6 $2.061 .82 $2.332.39 $72.97 S37
PAGE 61

36 TABLE IIJ -AJ Metro-Dade Tr ansit Agency DirccllyOperated and Purchased Motorbus Performance Jndicators PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Service Area Population ( 000 } Service Area S iz e (square miles) P anen ger Trips (000 ) Passenger Miles (000) Ve h icle Miles (000} Reve n u e M les (000) Vehicle Hour s (000} Reve nue Hours (000) Rou t e Miles Tot31 Operating E x p ense (000 ) Total Operatin g (000 o f 1984 $) Tota l Maint4na n ee Expe nse ( 000 ) 'l'otal Expense ( 000 of 1 984 $ ) To t a l Capital Ex p e n se (000) Tot al Local Revenu e (000 ) Ope r a t i n g R evenu e (00 0) P asse nger Fare Revenutt-' (000) Total Employees Transpon lltion Oper a ting E m ployees M aint e n ance Employees Administrat ive Employees Ve hicles Availabl e for Maximum Servi ce Voh i c los Operated in Maximum R atio I Consumed (000) Total E nerg y Consumed (000 of kwho urs) 1987 1,802 40 nl a 59,261.70 231,092.68 2 1 t 44.44 ........ 18.15 1 08 1, 578 99 1 463 65 1 554 7 0 $92 ,107. 52 $83 359.! 1 n i a nla nla $82,872 .09 $29,600.64 $27,687.31 n1a ni a nla nla n l a nla nJa nia ni a 1988 1 8 38 2 0 nla 53,736.79 204,799.49 22,489.80 19 ,42 8 06 1 6 67 09 1,545. 13 1 .573 .90 $93 886.49 .$81,9 1 0 22 nl a n/a n/a $89 977 .16 $35.234 88 $33, 120. 79 n l a nla n l a 526 00 42 5 00 23.76% nla n l a 1989 1, 873 08 n la 60,324.0 1 230 522 85 ,.: 24, 046.19 .. -. 21 0 21.17 1 823 59 1,694.64 1,649 1 0 $97 7 8 8.90 ,$81 ,8 1 6 93 n / a n/a nl a $91 055 6 1 $38 1 90. 1 4 $36 538 .93 n la nla nla n l a 576 00 f' 480. 00 20 00% nla nra 1990 I 1991 1. 937.09 .. 1,961 .69 n/a n /a 249 405 .86 56,279 73 ... 228, 1 89 76 1992 285.00 > .,. I 236 582 68 %Change 1987-1992 3.74% n/a 52% 2.38 % _, "))!><> I"" :: .-: 1 8 -i?'". ;.t f< 21,827.78 2 1. 238.29 21,817.64 ' '' 1.970 .21 1, 817 52 : : 1 ;991,.0!. 1.839.90 1 625 .83 1,725 .72 1,764.10 1 5 1 3 .60 1,596 .7 0 ,., 20 20% 26 10% 17. 9 1 % 2.70% $103.265.69 $82, 2 52 .03 $104 008 8 0 $78 ,3?0. 35 $108 475 .87 ' ' / I '> nia 17 .77% nla n r a I ., nla nla n /a I n l a $87 ,958 36 $87,879 .31 $39 ,416. 66 $41.610 47 $38 141.11 $39.935 .03 n/a I n / a nla 1!""-- nla _) nla < X ,.;v , n/a n / a $89, 1 09.76 7 53% $4 1 ,079. 58 38.78% $40 ,147. 5 1 45 00% n/a I n / a nla n i a n/a .'n l a .. n la 601.00 470 ,00 < 27.87% nla nla -:;:. t ;:,. I f .. 573 .00 I$< 47s .oo . 19. 62/t nla nla ... " ,, 770. 00 ,1\: .,. < I -co 9.87 % ,:,n/ .. a nl a n l a nla nla nJa "'

PAGE 62

PERFORMANCE INDI CATORS Setv ice Population (000) SoiVico Aroa Siz.o (squouo milo:;.) Pass e nger Trips {000} Passenger (000) Vohl c!o M ilos (000) nevenu e Miles (000) Vehicle l'lo u rs (000) Reven u e Ho u rs (000} Ro u te M ilOS T o t al Ope r aling ( 0 00 ) Total Ope r a t in g ExponsO ( 000 o f 1984 $ ) To tal Mainte n ance Expense (000) TilllLE 111114 Mctro-D:u.Jc Transit Agency Rapid Rail Pcrrormancc Indicators 1 987 . 1 ,802.40 n la 10,187 .89 79,873.00 4 ,865.00 4,708 .00 162.00 150.00 39.70 $39,622 .09 $35,858 .7 7 $ 1 7,928 .70 1988 1,838 2 0 nla 10,4_96 2 2 81,584.65 S, l-49.01 5 07 0 .'11 183.75 171.82 42..40 $37,463.10 $32, 684 .2 7 1989 : 1,873 .08 n/a 1 2, 127.90 95.449.87 4, 745. 91 4 .656.46 .. 207.70 > 194.55 42.20 $38, 1 61 .84 $31,928 .82 1990 1,937.09 oto 13 621.92 109, 692.67 5.575.13 5,444.4 1 . ,_ ... 241.46 17 8 9 1 4 2.2 0 rota! Maf.ntenance l:tpensc (000 011984 $) I,.. $ 1 6 22.5.82 $14. 562 .79 $12.705.14 $10,962 .3 t $12,004.95 $ 1 0,044.16 $4 1.960.62 $33, 4 22.00 $ 1 6 ,443.99 $14 ,690.80 $2,650.61 To tal Capita l Expe ns e (000) Total Loc31 Revenue (00?) . Oper ating Revenue (000) Passenger Fare Revct\ues (000) T ot J I E m p loyees Trans p o rlation Operating Employees MJio l enan ce E m p loyees Admi nistrat ive Employees Veh icles Ava if ablo for Ma.ximum S-er v ice Veh i c les Operated ill Max:imum SeN /ce S p;uo R;)t!o Total Gal:Ons Consumed (000) ''" T otal Energy Co n sumed (000 of kw-hours) $ 24, 782.81 $7,807.9 2 $7,332.42 526 .80 100.80' 249.30 176.70 130.00 71.00 83.10% n/a 44, 277.90 $37,463.10 $9, 3 5 5 .24 $0,616.65 487.00 79.60 236.40 17 1.00 130.00 74.00 7S.68% n/a 35,739.10 . $14,259 .68 $38, 1 61 .84 $10, 245 .00 $6,981 .2 1 487 .90 1 1 1.4 0 > 250.70 125.80 13 4 .00 70.00 91.43% :--. n/a 43, 187.00 $41,960.62 $11.202 .93 $10.012.24 452.20 106.20 264.80 79.20 136.00 82.00 65.65% n/a -14. 9 1 1.93 1991 1.96 1.69 ota 13,906.54 114 .331. 31 5 597.92 5.452.23 . 242.27 118.85 42.20 $44, 152 .68 $33 266.93 $20 1 0 5.12 $15, 149 15 $5.836.65 $44 152 .68 $13. 663 .78 $12. 865 01 458.40 1 02.70 264.60 91.10 1 36.00 86.00 58. 14% n t a 44,462.71 1992 1.735 .00 285.00 13 ,701.61 109 ,689. 0 1 5,382. 8 8 5 .230.82 .. 235.46 172.47 42.20 $43,195.39 $31 180.61 $20 .041.66 $ 1 4 ,467.08 $5. 595.94 $43, 195.39 $14.400.40 $ 13 ,830 .71 426.40 91. 6 0 261.50 73.30 136.00 82.00 65 85% n/a 42,850 7 3 o/ 19871992 3.74% nJa 34.49% 37.33% 10.65% 1 1.10% 45.34% 1-1.98% 6.30% 9.02(1/<) 1 3.05% 1 1 .79% -1 0 ,84% 77.42% 9.02% 8JI.43% 88.62% -19.06% 9 .13% 4 .89% 58 .52% 4 6 2 % 15.49% n/a n/a -3.22% 3 7

PAGE 63

PERF ORMANCE INDICATORS Setvice Population {000) Setvice Area S i ze ( square miles) Pas senger Trips (000) .. Passe n ge r Miles. (000) Vehicle Miles (000) Revenue Mil es (000) Vehide H o urs (000) Revanu& Hours (000) Roulo Mtles Total Operating Expense {0 00) Tot a l Operating Expense (000 of 1984 $) Total Maintenance Expen s e (000) Total Maintenance Expe n se (000 o f 1 984 S) Total Capilal E)IJ>CMC (000) T ot3J l o ca l Revenu e (000) Operating Revenue (000) Passe n ger F'ac e R e v e n ues (000 ) Tot $5,294.43 $5,137 .68 ... $3 317.56 $3. 1 92 .86 $4,485 .23 $3 204 00 $3,002.45 $ 2. 7 85.58 $3 752 66 $2.552 .01 $4 344 26 $ 1 1,347 .2 8 $883 70 $22,8 1 3 22 $4,917 .63 $4 607 20 $6 327 .99 $6 ,450. 24 $379 02 $379 20 $422 .10 $383 97 $379 .02 $379 20 $422. 1 0 $383 97 66.00 57 60 5 7.00 nso 7.60 6 00 5 50 6.50 30. 1 0 21 20 44 .20 55. 80 28.30 24.40 7 .30 10.20 12.00 12.00 12.00 12 .00 11.00 11. 00 11.00 9.00 9 09% 9 0 9 % 9 .09% 33 33% nla n/a nla nla 4.416 80 2 477 .90 2, 290.00 2, 97.58 ----19 91 1992 % Chane 1987-19 2 . 1,96 1 .69 1 735 .00 .74% nla 285 .00 n/a 3,229 .03 . -18.02% 2,771 35 2 589.96 4 .14% ,: .. 419 49 i 4 08.73 /, 399 66 369 54 1 8 6 % 38.65 37.50 .32%' 36.68 33.90 -7 37% 3 90 3 .90 2 63% $7 134.68 $7,046 06 43.28% . $5,37 5.96 $5 ,086.20 ,,,, 14.28% $3,778 69 $ 4 115 .32 24. 05% $2,847.23 > $2.970.65 -1. 06 % .. ' '" $41,355 33 $95 653.53 2 10 1 84% $7,134 .68 046.06; 43 28% . ... .. $379.96 5320.28 -15 50% $379.96 $320.28 15 50% 87.20 78.70 19 24% ' 10.00 10.20 34. 21% .. 68. 10 5 6.30 87 .04/o 9 10 .... 12.20 .. .69% 1 2 00 12 00 0 00% ._. .-.v. _, ., 9 00 9 00 .18% 33. 33% 33.33% nla nla .>-;;;( : _:;:.. n/a nla :'L: ,_., ,._ .... ... _,, ; 2,482 .01 2 407 .40 45 .49% ... -------

PAGE 64

TABLE III-A6 Metro-Dade Transit Agency Syslem Tolal Performance lndica1ors (Excluding Purchased Molorbus) PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 SefVioe Area Popu laOOn (000) 1 802.40 1,838.20 1 873.08 1,937 .09 1,96 1.69 1 ,735 00 74% I Service Are a Si:ze (sq u a r e mOOs) nla nla n/a nla nla 285 00 Ilia Pass.e nger Trips {000) ) 72,554 .54 66, '166 .64 71,824.73 72,51 9 .47 72, 266 .96 7 1,509.28 Passe n9tr M ; tes (000) 3 1 2 162 69 282 480 90 3 1 3 209 99 344.538 63 340, 954 26 345, 694.64 1 0 74% .Veh icle MUcs (000) ; '" 26,254 97 26 922.30 2 5 .991.41 27,S 0 9.93 28,195 .81 29, 154 1 8 11.04% Reve nue M i les (000) 23,097.84 23 964 1 6 23,488,74 25, 1 24 .21 2 5.875 5 1 26 ,035.70 12 72% I ' .o.:t Veh icle Hours ( 000) ', 1 ,770 .21 1 ,833 97 1,858 65 2,051 .56 2 015 .19 2,128 90 20 26% Revenue Hour s (000) 1 642 80 1 ,708 5 7 1,747 .21 1 863.80 1 715 0 1 1 819.06 10 .73% s .j. ' Route Miles 1,365 .30 ( 387.30 1 394.00 1. 397 .00 t.4 f 8 .80 1,489.40 9 09% Total Oper ating Expen$e (000) $ 136, 123 .76 $134,413 .06 $137,997.30 $146 529.96 $153.141 .75 $154,802 .33 13 7 2% Tolll!l Operat in g E xpense (000 of 1984 $) $111,267 .18 $115,456.05 $110 ,-409.93 $11 5 391 .69 $11 1 ,744 t 6 -9 29% Tota l Maintenance f)cpense (000) $49, 517 .65 $41 ,715.94 $.42,2$4 42 $49, 278 .33 $49. 36 1 .65 $50,06.2. 81 1 1 0 % . T o t a l Maintena nce Expense (000 of 1984 S) $44,814.44 $36,394.60 $35,352.9$ $37.131 09 S37 J93.87 S36, t37.86 19 36% Tota l Cal) i tal E xpense (000) $46, 898 .70 S37 504 20 $21,998 7 5 $49,124 .30 $48.277.22 $1 1 0.215 10 13 5 0 1 % T otal L ocal Reve nue (000) $126,888 .33 $130 ,503.72 $131.26"4.01 $131 ,222 .62 $ 137,012. 25 $ 1 35,436 27 6.74% Reve n u e (000) $3 7 ,714 ,61 $44,594 .75 $46,795 .41 $46,6'71 17 $55, 07 6 .24 $55,455.70 47. 04% Pusse n ger f ore Reven ues (000) $35 ,325.78 $41,742 .07 $43,880 42 $46 204 .94 $52,622.04 $53,9$3 .94 52. 73% Tot a l Employees 2 ,345.60 2,097 20 2.199 .60 2.156 .60 2.207 2 0 2 179 .00 -7 10% . .. T ransporta tion 01)er.ll.ing E mployees 1,272: .60 1, 1 20.40 1 2 t 3 .30 1 1 92.90 1,226 .60 1 ,226.20 3 65% Mainte n ance Employee$ 699. 00 616.40 671. 1 0 692. 1 0 707 1 0 680. 6 0 2 63% A
PAGE 65

40 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Service Pop u13t lon {000} Serv ice Area Size (square miles) Panenger Trips {000) Panenger Mites (000 ) Veh icle Miles (000) Revenue Mi l es (000) Vehicle Hours (000) Revenue Ho u rs (000 ) Route Maes To tal Opc r aling Expense (000} To!al Operating (000 of 1984 $) Tota l Maintenance Expe n se (000) Total Maintena n ce Expanse (000 of 1984 $) Tolal Capi ta l Expense (000) Tota l local Revenue (000) Ope r ating Reve nue (000) Passenger Fare R evenues (000} Tot31 Employees Transporta tio n Opera t in g Empbyees Maintenance Emp loyees Adminlstr,tiv& EmplOyees Vehicles Avaifab)e f o r Maximum Service Vehicles O per a ted In Maxim u m Service Spare Ra l io Total GaV .o ns Consumed {000) Tota l E n e rg y Consumed (000 of kwho u rs) TABLE Ill-A 7 Mttro-Dade Transit Agenc-y System Total Performance lndicacors 1987 1 ,802 40 nla 72, 72 1.51 313,452 .68 26,401A4 23.221.88 1 ,778.99 1 6$0.25 1,598 .20 $136 647 24 $123.668.43 n la nla nla $127 41 1. 81 $37 787.58 $35 398 75 n la n la nla nlo nJa nla nla n/a 46, 694.70 1988 1 ,838.20 nla 67,304.21 288,786.84 28,038 66 24 .883.98 1 890.11 1.755.0& 1 .620.20 s 135, 956.79 $116 6 1 3.99 : nlo nla nlo $132,047 .46 $44.969 32 $42.116 .63 nla n l o nla nla 668.00 510.00 30 98'4 nlo 36.217 00 1989 1,873 08 nla 75,756.91 328,799.69 26,036 45 2,064 33 1 ,922. 1 7 1,695.20 $142,276 73 . n l a nla nla s 135 545.44 $46 857.23 $45,942 24 n l a n la n la nla 722 .00 56 1 .00 28.70% nlo 4$ 477.00 1990 1,937 09 n la 77, 1 23 66 361,822.49 30,895.34 27 632.44 1991 1,961.69 nlo I;:;-73,415 .30 345,292.42 30,125 01. 27,090 .18 2 246.17 2,09 8.44 2 051.99 1,64 1.36 f ,810.2 0 1 ,559.70 $151,6 76.55 $155 296 .17 ... ,.. . $117 015 24 n/3 nta 1992 1.735.00 285 0 0 < 72.3 ? 6.59 348 861.65 30,841.22 27 418.00 1,932 .09 1 642.80 $158.71 7. 32 I . nla nla nla nta 1 nla s 1 36.369 .22 $51, 003.56 $48.537 .3 3 nla nla nla I nla nla I n/a $139, 1 66 67 $139,351.21 $55 654.20 $55 800 26 $53 200 .00 $54 298.50 nla I n/a nla nla nla nJa nlo nla 749.00 561.oo 1 721.00 574 .00 25.61% 994 00 : 33.51% .. 47,109.51 -n nla ,,,, ;.>", 46.944.72 15.45% ;:"' r,/a ) 45.258.13 "!.Change 1987-1992 .74% nlo 0.47% 11.30% 16.82% 18.07% 27.26% 17 .08% 2 79% 16 15 % nla n/a nla 9 .31%. 47.67% 53.39'10 nla rila nla nla nla nla n la nfa ,/,_' -7.06%

PAGE 66

EFFECT IVENESS MEASURE S SERVICE SUPPLY Vehic!e M iles Per Cap ita -N S ERVI CE CONSUMPTION Pa sse nger T r ips fOr paplta "' __ Passen ge r TtiJ)s Per Revenue M ite Passenger Trips Pe r Revenue Hour QUAL ITY OF SERVI CE Speed (R. M .IR.H. ) Average AQe of Fleet ( in years) N umber o f l n cii:fe n ts . Tota l Roadca ll s Reve n u e Mi les Between I ncidents (000) Reven v e Mi tes Between (000) AVAIIJ\SILITY ,. Reven u e Miles Per Route Mile (000) 'fABLE lll-A8 Metro-Dade Transit Agency Direttly-Operatc:d Motorbus Effecti v eness Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 11.65 11 .63 11 ,15 11.29 32.79 26.94 30.11 26,74 3 .28 2 .87 3 .05 2 .88 40.58 35.50 37. 1 1 33.30 12,38 1 2.35 12.16 1 1.56 6 .50 5.10 6 .13 5.39 1,414.00 1.477.00 1,298 .00 730.00 6.037.00 4 .507.00 2 .652 .00 3,403.00 12.75 12 .53 \4 ,23 26.47 2 .99 4 .11 6 .97 5 .68 13 .64 13.80 1 3 71 14.30 1 991 1992 "'o Change 1987 11. 61 13.47 1S.58% 28.1 0 31 77 -3.09% 2.75 2 70 35.35 34.18 -15.77% 12.84 12,67 2.36% 6 .25 7 1 3 9 .69% 1.235 .00 1,140.00 5 .507.00 9,117.00 $1.02% 16 2 1 l7.93 40 .61% 3.64 2.24 -24 .94% 14 .59 14, 16 3 .62% 41

PAGE 67

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPlY Vehicle M iles Per Capita SERVICE CONSUMPTION Pa$$en ger Trips Pe r Capita Passenge r T,..,s Per Revenue Mile Passenge r T rps Per Revenue Hour QUALITY OF SERVICE Aver3ge Speed ( ftM.IR H ) Ave r age Age of Fleet ( in yea rs) N u mber or Incidents T otJI Roadcalls Reven u e Miles Betwee n I n cide nts ( 000) Revenue M iles 6etween RoadcaUs (000) AVAILAB I LITY Revenue Miles Per Roule M i le (000) 42 TABLE IIIA9 Transit Agency Purchased Motorbus Effcctivc ness Measures 1987 1988 1989 1990 0 .08 0.61 1 .69 1.59 0.00 0.29 2 .10 2.38 1.35 0 .58 1.54 1 84 22 .41 11.56 22.47 27 37 16 65 19.7 8 14.56 14.91 n la nla n la nla nla nla . n la nla . n la .,. nla nla nla nla n/a n l nla nl> nJa nla 0 53 3 95 8 .4 6 6 07 1991 1992 "'o Change 1987-1992 F; p 68 .. 0.9.7 ; ., 1096.55% I I .... ,, . . :. 439.6z% 0.59 . : 0 50 .. . . ..... ,., . ... ' . 0 95 0 63 .39% ... 17.31 . 7.67 -65. 76% 18 .31 12.23 26.55% 5 1 5 5.63 nla . . . ' < .... ilia nla . . n/a .. ... . X(' , ... n la nla nla nla : . : nla nl> nla nla nla .. ... 3 .62 9.01 1591. 94%

PAGE 68

TABLE 111-AIO Metro -Dade Transit Agency Directly-Operated and Purchased Motorbus Effecth,eness Measures EFFECT IVENESS MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1990 1 991 SERV ICE SUPP L Y Veh .IC'Ie Mil es Pe r Capit a 11.73 12 23 12.84 12.88 12 29 SERVICE CONSUMPTION Pa$$e o ger Ttips Per Capita 32.88 29 23 32.2 1 31.11 28. 69 Passenger Tr,ps P e r Revenue M i'le 3.26 2.77 2 .87 2.76 2 6$ P<:lssenger Pe r Revenue Hour 40.49 34.7 8 35.60 32.76 34.62 Q UALITY OF SERV I CE Average Speed (R.MJR H ) 12.40 12 .57 12.40 1 1.85 13.06 Average Age of Fleet (In ye;1rs} nla n l a nla nla nla N u m ber of In-cidents nta nla nta n/a n l a Total Roadcalls nla n la nla nla n la Revenue Miles Betwee n I nciden t s (000) nla nla nla nl a n l a Revenue MilOs Between Roadcalls (000) nla n l a n/a nla nla AVAIL.ABlLI TY Revenue Miles Per Ro' ute Mile (000) 1 1.67 12.34 1 2 .75 12.37 14 .03 --------1 9 92 % 1987-19 2 14..44 23. 07% 32.27 .85'4 2 .57 -21.39% 32.45 -19 .86% 1 2 64 1.95% nla nla n /a 1 nfa nta nla n la " nla 13.66 17.04% 43

PAGE 69

EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES S E RV ICE SUPPLY Vehide Miles Per Capita SERVICE CONSUMPTION Pass.on get Trips Per Capita Per Revenu e Mile Passenger l tip$ Per Revenue Hour QUALITY OF SERVICE Averag& Spetd (R.M IR.H ) Average Age of Freet (m Number of l ncidenl-s Total Roadcalls Rev e nue Miles Between Incidents (000) Revenve Miles Between Roade<:alls (000) AVAILAB I LITY Reve n ue Miles Per Route Mile (000) 44 1 987 2.70 5.65 2 16 67.92 31.39 5 00 178 00 TABLE Ill-All Metro-Dade Transit Age-ncy Rapid Rail Effectiveness Measures 1988 1 989 2.80 . 2.53 5 .66 ... 6.47 2 .0 5 2.60 60.56 62.34 29.5 1 23. 93 6 .00 7 .00 156.00 1 52.00 nla nla nla 26.45 32 50 3G.63 .,. nl a nla 118 59 1 19 59 1 1 0.34 1990 2.88 7 .03 -2.50 76 14 30 .43 8 .00 nlo nla .. nla nla 1 29 .01 1991 1992 o;. 1987 -19 2 ., 2 .8 5 14.94% i I <-"' 39.7i% I 7.09 \ 7 90 .. .. <'"' -'< 2.55 2.62 21.05% 77.76 .. -. 79.4-4 16.97 % .. 30 .49 <: .3o.33 9.00 10.00 100.00% i 42.00 .. 1 05 00 -.41. 0 1 % I . ... ,. nla nla n la _., 129.6 1 \; -: 419.82 : 88 .3.5/o nla n/a n/a 129.20 4 52%

PAGE 70

E FFECTIVENESS MEASURES SERVICE SUPPLY Vel'licle Miles Per S ERVI CE CONSUMPT ION P3ssengor Trips Per Capila '' . Passenger Trl>s Per Revenue Mile . . P assenger T ills Per Revenue Hou r QUALITY OF SERV I C E Averag$ { R M.IR.H ) Age o! fteel (in years } Number of lneifCI'tS T otal Roadcals Reven u e Miles B etween Incidents {000) Revenue M iles Between Roadcalls (000 } AVAILASILITY Revenue Mi1es Per Route Mile (000) TABLE lllAI2 Metro-Dade Transll Agency AuComaled Guideway Effectiveness Me-asures 1 9 87 1 988 1989 1990 o n 0 22 0.19 0.19 1 82 1.72 1.76 1.67 9 02 8 .21 9 2 1 8 .98 89.40 82. 91 10 0.2 I 97.49 9 9 1 10.10 1 0.S8 10.86 2 00 3 00 4 ,00 5 .00 nla 10 00 "'" .,. n/a nla n/a 72. 5 6 .,. 35.88 .,. nla n/a n/a n/a 95 .. 7 98.76 92 00 9 2 .37 --1 991 1992 u 1987 1 9 2 0.21 0 .24 8 32% 1 65 1.55 -1H3% 8 08 7 .26 19 5 1 % 88.04 79 .12 11.49% 10.9 0 1 0 .90 9 96% 6 .00 7.00 250.00% 1 00 8.00 60.00% n/ a nla n /a 399 66 46.1 9 36.34% n/a "'' n /a 102, 48 94.75 75 % ----45

PAGE 71

46 TABLE 111-A13 Metro-Dade Transit Agency System Total Effectiveness Measures (Exc l ud ing Purchased Motorbus) EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES 1987 1988 1989 1 990 1991 SERVIC E SUPP L Y Vehicle Per Cap i ta 14 .57 14.65 13.66 14 .36 1 4.68 SERVIC E CONSUM PTION Passe n ger Trips Per Capit a 40 25 36.32 36.35 37.44 . .. 36.84 Passenger TripS P