163

Report No: Meeting Date:

Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District

STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Committee

AC Transit Board of Directors

FROM: David J. Armijo, General Manager

SUBJECT: 2014 Annual Ridership and Route Performance Report

BRIEFING ITEM

RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):

15-069 March 11, 2015

Consider receiving the 2014 Annual Ridership and Route Performance Report in accordance with Board Policy 550.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This report contains ridership information for the local, AII-Nighter and Transbay services, and provides performance analyses by route. Overall, average weekday ridership increased by 2.1% between 2013 and 2014, while average Saturday and Sunday ridership increased by 2.3% and 1.6% respectively during the same period. While ridership increases were quite significant between 2012 and 2013~ capacity issues on the most -heavily used routes became pronounced in 2014 and contributed to the modest ridership growth.

In accordance with Board Policy 550 (Service Standards and Design Policy), this report also assesses the District's service performance according to a variety of metrics, including ridership, productivity, load factor, headway/frequency, and on-time performance, in accordance with Board Policy 550.

The lowest-performing 25% of the District's routes, as measured by passengers per hour, were also identified . Staff will determine corrective action to improve these routes prior to the 2015 annual performance report. Improvements that would be considered include frequency adjustments, route efficiency improvements, route discontinuance or consolidation, and increased marketing. In addition, minority routes were identified and analyzed to determine that service accessibility (distance to service) is equitably distributed between minority and non­minority areas of the District.

BUDGETARY/ FISCAL IMPACT:

There are no budgetary/fiscal impacts associated with this report.

164

Report No. 15-069 Page 2 of 8

BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:

Introduction

The 2014 Annual Ridership and Route Performance Report contains information for the local, AII-Nighter, and Transbay Services, and provides performance analyses by route. Average weekday ridership increased by 2.1% between 2013 and 2014, average Saturday ridership increased by 2.3%, and average Sunday ridership increased by 1.6%. The slower rate of ridership growth between 2013 and 2014 is primarily the result of capacity limitations on the most heavily-used routes.

This report also assesses the District's service performance by route in both minority and non­minority communities. In addition, the report complies with the annual reporting requirements of Board Policy 550.

Multi Year Trend

Figure 1 below presents the t rend in average weekday ridership since 2006. Saturday and Sunday trends are shown since 2009 when reliable weekend data became available.

210,000

200,000

190,000

180,000

170,000

160,000

150,000

140,000

130,000

120,000

110,000

100,000

90,000

80,000

70,000

60,000

Figure 1 Average Daily Ridership, 2006 to 2014

193,6'(:1:

....... ~ll.'l.,I;A.I; ,,~~

"-.n.tr18!t 1 71,121 ..,...-.. 167,69~ ,___ 168,383 169,~

-- --

97,465 9'r,3 .... 87,944 85,336 88,541____...-....

...... 77,344 7t;8t2

67,956 1'1,48, ..... 65 596 ;.---

-2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

.... Average Weekday Ridership ~Average Saturday Ridership _._Average Sunday Ridership

187,468 -

99;'67-r-

78,594

2014

The increases shown in 2008 and 2009 are indicative of the maturation of the service adjustments that were implemented in 2007, which included the introduction of Routes 1 and 1R. Similarly, the decreases in 2010 and 2011 reflect the service reduct ions that were put in place in March 2010 and October 2010 to address the District's fiscal emergency at the time.

Since that time, the Dist rict has steadily grown ridership for three straight years with notable growth in the past years due to growth in the economy coupled with improved operations and

165

Report No. 15-069 Page 3 of 8

modest service expansion. This trend should continue as the District expands fleet, facilities, operators and service commensurate with the passage of Measure BB.

Service Type Analysis

The bulk of the AC Transit route network was relatively stable in 2014, except for a reconfiguration of low-productivity routes in Central and Southern Alameda County as identified in the previous year's report that yielded relatively significant ridership gains. Starting in December 2013, a number of routes were adjusted to increase operating efficiency. Attachment 1 provides detailed route-by-route information for all services operated by the District. Attachment 2 contains a service type comparative analysis between 2013 and 2014 by day type.

In general, approximately half of all individual routes exhibited an increase in ridership between 2013 and 2014. Collectively, however, systemwide ridership increased by modest percentages. Weekday service saw increases of 3.9% in the Trunk, local, and Owl service types. Weekday Transbay services remained essentially unchanged with a 0.1% decrease between the two years. The weekday Rapid services saw a decrease of 0.8%, while the most noteworthy decreases were in the Community and Supplemental service types at 5.5% and 10.4% respectively. It should be noted that while the Community service type saw a decrease of 10.2% in the number of trips and a decrease of 20.9% in revenue hours (primarily due to the 2012 Central and South County Restructuring Plan), its productivity measures improved significantly; passengers per trip increased by 5.1% and passengers per revenue hour increased by 19.5%.

For Saturday and Sunday service, only the Transbay service type showed ridership declines between 2013 and 2014. Every other service type exhibited an increase in ridership between the two years. As with Weekday service, the Community service type for both Saturday and Sunday saw a significant decrease in revenue hours of 20.7% and 23.5% respectively between 2013 and 2014. However, ridership in that service type increased for both day types, leading to an increase in passengers per revenue hour of 45.6% on Saturdays and 47.3% on Sundays.

Route Analysis

Focusing specifically on routes that have gained or lost ridership by 10% or more, staff completed some analyses on route performance between 2013 and 2014, which provides some explanation behind the data. As in past years, these have been ordered by geographic sub­region:

• Western Contra Costa County:

o Route 74: Has shown a 21% increase in ridership on weekdays. Weekday frequency on this route was increased from every 40 minutes to every 30 minutes in December 2013, likely resulting in the ridership increase.

• Oakland/ Alameda/Emeryville:

o Route 73: Continues to exhibit ridership growth across all day types, underscoring the importance of the 73rd/Hegenberger travel corridor.

166

Report No. 15-069 Page 4 of 8

Most notably, average weekday ridership has grown from 2,949 to 3,559 between 2013 and 2014, for an increase of almost 21%. While much of the ridership growth is attributed to the key transfer locations along the route-Eastmont Transit Center, International Boulevard, and Coliseum BART -there is also an increase in passenger activity along Hegenberger Road between Coliseum BART and Oakland International Airport.

• Central Alameda County:

o Route 85: This route underwent major changes in December 2013 when it was combined with Route 68. As a result, it has shown a 23% increase in ridership on weekdays. However, weekend ridership has not performed similarly, with ridership declining by 24% on Saturday and 26% on Sunday due to poor frequency and long travel times.

o Route 99: Has demonstrated robust ridership growth across all three day types-59% on weekdays, 41% on Saturdays, and 29% on Sundays. The frequency increase on this route and improvements to Mission Boulevard have contributed to this growth.

• Southern Alameda County:

In December 2013, staff implemented the Central and South County Restructuring Plan. The goal of the plan was to increase productivity in South County by making the network more legible to passengers and reallocating resources to areas with higher transit demand. The improvements included increased frequency on Route 99 from every 30 minutes to every 20 minutes; converting circular routes to linear routes with clear destinations on each end, and a new route along Mowry Avenue and Decoto Road providing a new 3D­minute frequent service through the core of Fremont and Newark. The plan also reconfigured the weekend routes to replicate the weekday routes for better network legibility. As a result, weekday ridership grew by 33% and weekend ridership increased 52% across the plan area. Aside from the Restructuring Plan, another reason for this unprecedented growth is the opening of Northwestern Polytechnic University on Warm Springs Boulevard, served by lines 217 and 239.

At the route level, Southern Alameda County contains the five routes exhibiting the highest weekday percentage ridership growth between 2013 and 2014. These include the 99, 210, 215, 217, and 239. Except for the 210, all these routes saw service adjustments in December 2013 as part of the Central & South Alameda County Restructuring Plan.

o Route 217: Has seen unprecedented ridership increases between 2013 and 2014. While weekday ridership growth is substantial {30%), it is the weekend ridership growth on this route that is absolutely staggering, by more than double {113% on Saturday and 126% on Sunday). The presence of the Northwestern Polytechnic University campus on Warm

167

Report No. 15-069 Page 5 of8

Springs Boulevard has been a major factor in this route's ridership increases.

o Route 251: While the route was reconfigured as part of the Central & Southern Alameda County Restructuring Plan in December 2013, the route has suffered a loss of ridership across all three day types, ranging from 66% on weekdays to 71% on Saturdays. Route 251 pieced together the remaining unproductive segments of the Restructuring Plan for area coverage.

• Transbay:

While ridership growth on Transbay service has leveled off between 2013 and 2014, seven routes continued to exhibit double-digit percentage ridership increases. The three Transbay routes that saw the greatest ridership growth in 2014 were the J (19.1%), CB (18.3%), and B (14.6%). These are routes that had available capacity in 2013.

Top Performing Routes

The tables below demonstrate two different ways of reviewing the District's top performing routes. Table 1 is ordered by the productivity measure of passengers per revenue hour. Table 2 is ordered by average number of weekday passengers per route.

Table 1 Top 10 Routes Ordered by Passengers Per Revenue Hour (Weekday Service)

. I ; ; .. I . ' Average

..

.· Rank .. · ; . ; !.··

Rollte Type .,

1 Pa•noers . Pa~noers , Ro\lte .. Dally ·.· per. Revenue

. . .. ·

•••••• Ridership Hour ··· .per Trip

. ; ; • . 1 518 Trunk 10,367 74.2 53.4 2 54 Urban Crosstown 2,541 57.5 21.4 3 52 Urban Crosstown 2,802 53.8 31.1 4 73 Major Corridor 3,559 53.2 25.8 5 40 Trunk 10,372 52.2 53.7 6 1R Rapid 10,835 51.8 82.7 7 51 A Trunk 9,980 51.0 49.9 8 FS Transbay 312 48.6 39.0 9 39 Urban Crosstown 624 44.8 22.3 10 J Transbay 530 44.6 37.9

168

Report No. 15-069 Page 6 of 8

Table 2 Top 10 Routes Ordered by Average Daily Passengers (Weekday Service)

l::h. ..

' . . .

.. R()l,l\fType

Average· :PaS.nge~; Passengers Rallk ,

1 Rou.te D~lif·.'· per Revenue per Trip

Rlder8hr~·- Hour .·.

1 1R Rapid 10,835 51.8 82.7 2 40 Trunk 10,372 52.2 53.7 3 518 Trunk 10,367 74.2 53.4 4 1 Trunk 10,270 41.9 80.9 5 51 A Trunk 9,980 51.0 49.9 6 18 Trunk 8,019 39.8 58.1 7 57 Trunk 7,438 44.1 52.0 8 72R Rapid 6,139 36.0 45.8 9 97 Major Corridor 4,394 31.8 39.2 10 72 Trunk 4,384 33.6 59.2

Together, the 10 routes listed in Table 2 account for approximately 44% of the District's total weekday ridership.

Board Policy 550 Reporting Requirements

Board Policy 550 requires staff to provide an assessment of route performance to the Board of Directors on an annual basis. The assessment includes a ranking of routes on a variety of metrics. In addition, Policy 550 requires the identification of Minority Transit routes as defined by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

For this report, route-level and system-wide performance analysis is based on the following metrics:

• Ridership

• Ridership Productivity

• Vehicle Load Factor

• Vehicle Headway/Frequency

• On-Time Performance

• Minority Route

• Service Accessibility

Attachment 1 has definitions of the first six metrics listed above. With the route-level data, Board Policy 550 requires an assessment of service that falls below the 25th percentile within a category and an evaluation of potential changes, including but not limited to route marketing, schedule adjustments, running time adjustments, route improvements, and route discontinuance.

169

Report No. 15-069 Page 7 of8

System-wide Performance Data

Service Accessibility is evaluated in our service area (including Union City) by two variables: the distance from the centroid of each Census Block Group in our service area to its nearest bus stop, and the daily trip count of that nearest bus stop. If, for a Census Block Group, the distance is<= 0.25 mile and the daily trip count of the nearest stop is >=14 (equivalent to hourly service from 6 am to 8 pm), this would indicate that it has good service accessibility. About 78.42% of the Minority Census Block Groups have good service accessibility on Weekday, followed by 67.72% on both Saturday and Sunday. Table 3 below summarizes this information.

Table 3 Percentage of Census Block Groups with Good Service Accessibility

(Winter 2014 signup)

·Service Types Weekday saturday Sunday

All Census Block Groups in the Service Area 72.5% 60.8% 60.8%

Minority Census Block Groups 78.4% 67.7% 67.7%

Non-Minority Census Block Groups 65.8% 53.0% 53.0%

Route Analysis

As required in Policy 550, staff analyzed the routes performing in the bottom quarter of each service type as measured by productivity (passengers per hour). Staff conducted this analysis for weekday service. Based on Policy 550, the options for remedial action include:

1. Frequency adjustments 2. Running time adjustments or minor route changes 3. Route efficiency improvements 4. Route Discontinuance 5. Other actions such as grant-funding opportunities or additional marketing

The list of low performing routes is shown as follows in Table 4.

Table 4 Lowest Performing Routes

R()ute ,. ·Ro(lte 'l)t~e ···,···· Rblite .

... ~()ute,:Ty~e · ~OUts · \R~llte Type . , ····· .·

..... ' ·' ·'. '· ' ) ·.:/·-· .' . ' 25 Urban Crosstown 83 Suburban Crosstown LA Trans bay 32 Urban Crosstown 85 Suburban Crosstown LC Trans bay

37 Urban Crosstown 94 Suburban Crosstown M Transbay 47 Urban Crosstown 99 Major Corridor NXC Transbay 48 Urban Crosstown 275 Very Low Density s Trans bay 72 Trunk 314/356 Very Low Density SB Trans bay 72M Trunk 376 Owl z Transbay 74 Urban Crosstown 851 Owl

170

Report No. 15-069 Page 8 of 8

Staff is currently preparing service improvement recommendations under the Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA). The goal of the COA is to increase ridership and productivity system-wide, which will include a close examination of lower performing routes, including those listed above. COA recommendations for these routes will include the remedial actions listed above and under Board Policy 550.

ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:

There are no advantages or disadvantages associated with this report since it solely reports on route performance as required by Board Policy 550.

ALTERNATIVES ANAL VSIS:

There are no alternatives associated with this report since the monitoring requirements under Board Policy 550 are clearly outlined.

PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:

SR 14-038- 2013 Annual Ridership Report

SR 14-093- 2014 Annual Route Performance Report

ATTACHMENTS:

1: Methodology & Definitions

2: Route-level Performance Table 3: Service Type Performance Tables

Department Head Approval: Aida R. Asuncion, Interim Chief Planning, Engineering, and Construction Officer

Reviewed by: Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development

Prepared by: Howard Der, Planning Data Administrator Huaqi Yuan, Planning Data Administrator Ajay Martin, Scheduling Data Administrator

171

METHODOLOGY

ATIACHMENTl METHODOLOGY & DEFINITIONS

SR 15-069

Attachment 1

Staff used ridership from Fall 2014 to develop the information in this report. Each route was compared between 2013 and 2014 on average daily ridership, passengers per hour, and passengers per trip .. Service operating parameters-daily trips operated and daily revenue hours-increased slightly between the two reporting years. Where ridership increased at a greater rate than the increase in trips or revenue hours, passengers per trip or passengers per revenue hour would show net growth between the two years. If ridership increased by a lower rate or even showed a decrease between the two years as compared to trips or revenue hours, passengers per trip or passengers per revenue hours would show net decline between two years.

DEFINITIONS

Ridership is the average daily ridership for a given route and day type using automatic passenger counter data from the Fall 2014 sign up period.

Productivity is the calculation of passengers per revenue hour by dividing the average daily ridership for a given route and day type by the number of revenue hours for a given route and day type. The source information is the schedule recap report for the Fall 2014 sign up period.

Vehicle Load Factor is the calculation of passenger load divided by the vehicle seating capacity for a given route and day type using automatic passenger counter data from the Fall 2014 signup period. There are two calculations-the average (mean) vehicle load factor and the maximum vehicle load factor. The average (mean) vehicle load factor is the load factor at any point along the route, whereas the maximum load factor is the highest load factor at a specific point along the route and generally corresponds to the time period at which a given route sees the highest level of passenger activity.

Frequency describes how often buses operate during a specific period, either peak (generally 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM in mornings and 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM in afternoons) or off-peak (all other times).

On Time Performance {OTP} is derived from automatic vehicle location (AVL) data and is shown for a given route and day type. Service is considered to be early if it is observed to be more than one (1) minute ahead of the published schedule time, late if is observed to be more than five (5) minutes past the published schedule time, and on-time if it is observed to fall within the one minute early/five minute late envelope.

Minority Route- According to FTA Circular 4702.1B ("The Circular"), a minority transit route is a route that has at least 1/3 of its total revenue mileage in a Census block or block group, or traffic analysis zone(s) (TAZ) with a percentage of minority population that exceeds the

172

percentage of minority population in the transit service area. Total mileage for a route in this analysis is the total length of all street segments served by that route in our service area (including Union City) for all service types and day types. For Transbay routes, staff took the total length of all street segments from its first stop to last stop in the East Bay as the total mileage.

Route-level performance data for the seven metrics described above are available in Attachment 2.

173

Weekdav

•

R'ou10 .·

1~ 7

11 12 14 18 20 21 22 25 26 31 32 37 39 40 45 46 47 48 49

51 A 51B 52 54 57

58L 60 62 65 67 68 70 71 72

72M 72R 73 74 75 76 83 85 86 88 89 93 94 95 97 98 99

200 210 212 215 216 217 232 239 242 251 264 275 333 339

I "';'~'(;"'

Page 1 of3

'~' c ••• ' ; ;· · .... · ..

~~~~ Suburban Crosstown

Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown

Trunk Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown

Trunk Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown

Trunk Trunk

Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown

Trunk Urban Crosstown

Suburban Crosstown Urban Crosstown

Suburban Crosstown Suburban Crosstown Suburban Crosstown

Urban Crosstown Urban Crosstown

Trunk Trunk Rapid

Major Corridor Urban Crosstown

Suburban Crosstown Urban Crosstown

Suburban Crosstown Suburban Crosstown Suburban Crosstown

Major Corridor Suburban Crosstown Suburban Crosstown Suburban Crosstown Suburban Crosstown

Major Corridor Urban Crosstown

Major Corridor Suburban Crosstown

Major Corridor Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density Very Low Density

Feeder Very Low Density

Owl

c.!'~~ ·. -~~~ M~ ~;·~ I ~e ,.OIJ'i•

40 30 20 15 15 30 30 30 40 20 30 60 60 60

8-20 20 60 45 60 30 10

10-40 15 -

10-30 15 30 20 20

30-60 30-52

60 30 30 30 30 12 15 30 60 30 60 60

25-60 20 30 60 60 37 20 20 20 30 30 30 45 60 30 60 45 60 60

55,60 45 n/a n/a n/a n/a

~~ 40 30

20-30 15-30

15 30 30 30 40 30 30 60 64 60

8-20 30 60 45 60 30 12

12-40 35 15 15 30 20 20 60 40 60 30 30 30 30 12 15 30 60 30 60 60

20-45 20 30 60 60 37 20

20-30 30 30 30 30 45

60-63 30 65 45 60 60 60

60-63 60

4 trips each way

1 trip each way

30

No Yes No

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No

Yes Yes Yes No

Yes No No n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes n/a Yes n/a Yes n/a Yes Yes Yes

~;1 44 61 78 100 138 76 62 70 40 81 66 32 31 28 193 62 28 21 29 54

200 194 90 119 143 46 105 102 60 43 n/a 58 58 74 72 134 138 64 30 60 32 30 77 96 64 31 • 24 52 112 80 103 74 69 72 38 27 72 30 38 n/a 28 n/a 37 nta 8 2 15

~6;~ 30.9 58.8 76.2 94.1

201.3 75.2 60.9 69.0 39.4 80.1 65.3 33.3 28.9 13.9

196.8 78.3 13.8 7.9

28.7 66.3 195.7 139.7 52.1 44.2 166.7 39.3 34.7 82.3 29.6 12.5

-· nfa 43.0 71.2 13D.4 121.3 170.6 66.9 62.3 29.8 70.8 31.4 57.6 41.4 78.5 67.0 30.5 11 .8 16.0 136.1 64.1 153.4 71.4 68.2 54.7 28.5 26.8 84.1 30.7 26.9 n/a 14.5 n/a

27.8 n/a 3.9 1.9

28.2

~o:!~~ 708

1,575 2,371 3,305 7,898 2,937 1,881 2,335

844 2,510 1,753

731 477 611

10,055 2,204

468 128 419

2,165 10,083 10,030 2,825 2,439 7,184 1,054

726 3,358

877 307 348

1,201 1,796 4,318 4,031 6,665 2,949 1,132

519 2,504

560 834 768

2,614 1,182

715 163 400

4,333 1,583 2,653

1,660 968 215 369

1,673 464 532 469 566 383 290

57 64 17

304

Rn' '' '' !Table •. ·. ~0131 . . . .

P.rtrip •. ~ ""'' 4~';.r ! .:· ~.:. ._~i · •• .. 47 52.5 22.9 27.9 31.0 35.1 41.2 39.1 30.9 33.6 21.4 31.5 26.9 22.0 16.5 43.9 50.6 28.1 35.0 16.3 14.6 32.6 52.4 71.5 55.4 55.2 45.6 26.9 20.9 40.4 29.6 24.5 12.1 27.9 25.7 34.7 37.2 40.2 44.1 24.4 17.5 40.7 17.8 27.3 18.6 33.3 17.6 23.3 15.4 25.9 35.4 24.7 26.0

24.3 16.9

7.2 12.4 20.1 15.5 20.7 16.6 18.0 12.6 10.5 4.6

16.5 8.9

11.2

16.1 27.2 30.4 33.1 56.1 38.6 30.3

70.1% 73.1% 73.5% 64.9% 65.1% 63.2% 68.9%

33.4 74.4% 21.1 71.5% 31.0 62.0% 26.6 65.8% 22.8 75.1% 15.4 79.8% 21.8 62.1% 52.1 69.6% 26.9 70.3% 17.3 65.3% 6.1 76.8%

14.4 75.2% 40.1 66.5% 51.4 71.0% 51.7 68.9% 3l4 68.3% 20.5 66.2% 50.2 49.6% 22.0 64.3%

6.9 71.5% 32.9 66.2% 14.6 82.4%

7.1 62.4% 11.6 70.5% 20.7 76.0% 31.5 73.6% 56.4 54.7% 56.6 55.5% 49.7 63.4% 21.4 70.5% 23.6 53.4% 17.3 51.7% 42.4 62.5% 17.5 77.3% 27.8 60.7% 10.0 84.1% 27.2 71.8% 16.5 70.0% 23.1 66.2% 6.8 69.6% 7.1 57.9%

36.7 63.1% 19.6 71.2%

. 38.4 54.7% New service 24.1 67.3% 16.1 65.6% 5.7 62.8%

12.3 62.4% 23.2 66.5% 15.5 73.5% 15.6 70.8% 13.8 78.6% 20.2 75.0% 12.8 64.8% 10.4 72.3% 4.8 57.6% 8.0 45.3% 8.5 32.9%

20.3 54.7%

0.40 0. '1 0.43 0.75 0.30 0.52 0.33 0.68 0.35 0.64 0.30 0.59 0.33 0.70 0.26 0.49 0.27 0.48 0.30 0.56 0.27 0.53 0.21 0.46 0.28 0.54 0.27 0.50 0.22 0.40 0.32 0.47 0.36 0.59 0.20 0.40 0.22 0.41 0.09 0.15 0.23 0.39 0.33 0.86 0.44 0.80 0.44 0.86 0.29 0.50 0.33 0.48 0.33 0.54 0.24 0.43 0.12 0.20 0.30 0.52 0.31 0.55 0.16 0.27 0.15 0.29 0.26 0.40 0.27 0.49 0.37 0.67 0.33 0.64 0.46 0.76 0.24 0.43 0.17 0.35 0.16 0.32 0.37 0.65 0.28 0.48 0.35 0.58 0.18 0.30 0.27 0.49 0.23 0.44 0.28 0.54 0.12 0.21 0.17 0.25 0.28 0.46 0.16 0.32 0.29 0.49

0.26 0.24 0.15 0.16 0.40 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.28 0.21 0.17 0.06 0.19 0.11 0.17

0.43 0.49 0.22 0.31 0.64 0.38 0.40 0.33 0.46 0.38 0.29 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.32

10,~~~ 726

1,763 2,194 3,401 8,019 3,139 1,996 2,367

841 2,548 1,687

705 489 624

10,372 2,334

433 143 428

1,968 9,960

10,367 2,802 2,541 7,436 1 '119

808 3,213

776 301

1,187 1,749 4,364 4,266 6,139 3,559 1,368

531 2,610

515 1,022

780 2,641 1,272

655 152 318

4,394 1,760 4,227 1,466 2,413

845 303 429

2,178 517 801

195 I 24o 1

781 19 327

~~.~ 23.5 30.0 28.8 36.1 39.8 41.8 32.6 34.3 21.4 31.6 25.9 21.2 16.9 44.8 52.2 29.8 31.4 18.0 14.9 29.7 51.0 74.2 53.8 57.5 44.1 28.5 23.3 39.0 26.2 24.0

27.6 24.6 33.6 35.2 36.0 53.2 21.9 17.8 36.9 16.4 17.7 16.8 33.6 19.0 21.5 12.9 19.9 31.8 27.5 27.5 20.8 35.4 15.4 10.7 16.0 25.9 16.8 27.7

13.51

8.6 I

20.21 10.0 11 .6

2014

. oe[TriP ' f;lQ Tf"l" ',A.V.rB.~•

~~.~ ;~~~ 16.5 68.1% 28.9 71.0% 28.1 72.0% 34.0 65.6% 58.1 65.1% 41.3 62.4% 32.2 58.7% 33.8 76.3% 21.0 74.7% 31.5 63.4% 25.6 72.0% 22.0 74.0% 15.8 78.6% 22.3 63.1% 53.7 69.0% 28.5 73.3% 15.5 73.9% 6.8 66.0%

14.8 81.8% 36.4 69.0% 49.9 65.5% 53.4 72.8% 31.1 68.2% 21.4 68.8% 52.0 69.4% 23.3 67.2%

7.7 82.7% 31.5 55.2% 12.9 80.0%

7.0 55.1% Discontinued service

20.5 71.6% 30.2 71.5% 59.2 67.9% 59.3 66.2% 45.8 68.8% 25.8 77.9%, 21.4 59.0% 17.7 64.0% 43.5 63.6% 16.1 79.9% 34.1 66.6% 10.1 63.5% 27.5 70.9% 19.9 63.1% 21.1 66.8%

6.3 71.8% 6.1 85.2%

39.2 70.9% 22.0 69.8% 41.0 65.4% 20.1 62.0% 35.0 67.0% 11.7 66.0% 8.0 76.5%

15.9 64.4% 30.3 60.2% 17.2 57.0% 21.1 65.0%

Discontinued service 7.o I 80.1%

Discontinued service 6.51 72.8%

Discontinued service

9.81 67.2% 9.5 67.2%

21.8 62.2%

~:.: 0.29 0.22 0.32 0.30 0.35 0.29 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.27 0.26 0.22 0.31 0.38 0.22 0.19 0.11 0.21 0.31 0.41 0.43 0.32 0.32 0.35 0.26 0.11 0.28 0.28 0.15

0.26 0.27 0.35 0.32 0.41 0.27 0.15 0.20 0.37 0.26 0.33 0.19 0.27 0.25 0.26 0.10 0.14 0.33 0.18 0.27 0.20 0.30 0.19 0.18 0.22 0.41 0.22 0.29

0.15

0.12

0.11 0.13 0.15

0.73 0.78 0.50 0.49 0.60 0.59 0.71 0.54 0.49 0.53 0.53 0.55 0.54 0.48 0.40 0.47 0.61 0.43 0.36 0.18 0.38 0.77 0.74 0.64 0.58 0.48 0.56 0.46 0.19 0.50 0.49 0.25

0.39 0.49 0.65 0.63 0.68 0.49 0.33 0.38 0.66 0.45 0.59 0.32 0.47 0.46 0.50 0.19 0.22 0.56 0.33 0.49 0.35 0.56 0.35 0.29 0.43 0.62 0.40 0.48

0.24

0.21

0.22 0.16 0.34

l;r; -~.8% 2.5% 11.9% -7.5% 2.9% 1.5% 6.9% 6.1% 1.4% -0.4% 1.5% -3.6% -3.6% 2.5% 2.1% 3.2% 5.9% -7.5% 11.7% 2.1% -9.1% -1.0% 3.4% -0.6% 4.2% 3.5% 6.2% 11.3% -4.3%

-11.5% -2.0%

nla -1.2% -2.7% 1.5°/1) 5.6% -7.9% 20.7% 20.8% 2.3% 4.2% -8.0% 22.5% 1.6% 1.0% 7.6% -6.4% -6.7%

-20.5% 1.4%

11.2% 59.3%

nla 45.4% -12.7% 40.9% 16.3% 30.2% 11.4% 50.6%

nta -65.5%

nta -17.2%

nla 21.9% 11.8% 7.5%

.·· . -12.7% -1.4% 2.5% 7.6% -7.2% 2.9% -3.4% 6.9% 6.1% 1.4% -0.4% 1.0% -3.8% -3.6% 2.5% 2.1% 3.2% 6.2%

-10.2% 10.6% 2.1% -9.0% -2.7% 3.8% -2.8% 4.2% -3.3% 5.8% 11.3% -3.5% -11.5% -2.0%

nta -0.9% -4.3% -3.2% -5.4%

-10.5% 20.8% -10.0% 2.0% -9.4% -8.0%

-35.0% 1.5% 1.0% 7.6% -7.8%

-16.5% -23.3% -10.0% 11.2% 6.0% n/a

45.4% -8.8% 47.5% 28.9% 28.7% 8.9% 34.3%

nta -25.1%

nta -18.0%

nla 21.9% 11.8% 3.9%

SR 15-069

Attachment 2

2.5% 6.4% -7.5% 2.9% 0.1% 6.9% 6.1% 1.4% -0.4% 1.5% -3.8% -3.6% 2.5% 2.1% 3.2% 5.9%

-10.6% 11.7% 2.1% -9.1% -3.0% 3.4% -0.8% 4.2% 3.5% 6.2% 11.3% -4.3% -11.5% -2.0%

nta -1.2% -4.4%, 1.5% 4.4% -7.9% 20.7% -9.4% 2.3% 2.5% -8.0% 22.5% 1.6% 1.0% 7.6% -8.4% -6.7%

-14.4% 1.4%

11.2% 6.7% n/a

45.4% -27.3% 40.9% 29.2% 30.2% 11.4% 34.7%

n/a -65.5%

n/a -37.4%

n/a 21.9% 11.8% 7.5%

-4.1?o 0.2%

-2.1% -1.5% 0.6% 0.0% -0.7%

-10.2% 3.6% 3.3% 1.4% 6.2% -1.2% -1.2% 0.9% -0.6% 3.0% 8.6%

-10.6% 6.7% 2.5% -5.4% 3.9% -0.1% 0.6% 19.6% 2.9% 11.2% -11.0% -2.4% -7.3%

n/a -6.4% -2.2% 13.2% 10.7% 5.4% 7.3% 5.6% 12.3% 1.1% 2.6% 6.0% -0.6% -0.9% -6.9% 0.6% 2.0%

27.4% 7.8% -1.4% 10.7%

nla -0.3% 0.2% 13.6% 2.0% -8.3%

-16.5% -5.6%

nta 5.1% nla

0.5% nla

22.0% 34.3% 7.5%

-3.3% -33.3% -8.6%, 0.0% 6.1% 11.5% -3.7%, -6.7% -3.7% 19.0% -3.6% -3.7% 0.0% -3.1% 5.6% 10.0% -13.6% 22.2% -8.7% -6.1% -6.8% -2.3% 10.3% -3.0% 6.1% 8.3% -8.3% -6.7% -9.7%

.

-6.3% nta

0.0% 0.0% -5.4% -3.0%

-10.9% 12.5% -11.8% 25.0% 0.0% -7.1% -5.7% 5.6% 0.0% 8.7%, -7.1% -16.7% -17.6% 17.9% 0.0% -6.9%

nta 15.4% -20.8% 20.0%, 37.5% 2.5% 4.8% 38.1%

n/a -46.4%

n/a -29.4%

nta -42.1% 18.2% -11.8%

0.0% 1.4%

10.2% 2.1% -5.4% 0.0% 19.6% 0.0% -4.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.4% 7.5%

-12.2% 20.0% -2.6%

-10.5% -7.5% -2.3% 16.0% 0.0% 3.7% 7.0% -5.0% -3.8% -10.9% -7.4%

nta -2.5% 0.0% -3.0% -1.6%

-10.5% 14.0% -5.7% 18.8% 1.5% -6.2% 1.7% 6.7% -4.1% 4.5% -7.4% -9.5%

-12.0% 21.7% 3.1% 0.0% n/a

30.2% -28.6% 31.8% 38.7% -3.1% 5.3%

20.0% n/a

-47.8% n/a

-27.6% n/a

37.5% 6.7% 6.3%

211812015,9:07 AM

174

Weekdav

Poak OffPoak Minority Revenue Total Ave,...

PovductMty ........... On Time A ...... A ...... Ave._ Productivity ...... Route Type Revenue Doily Maximum I Doily

. Frequency Frequency ....... Tripe Hou,. RidershlD (Pu/RevHr) per Trip Pedonnance Loil;d Factor

Rid hi (Pax/RevHr)

605 School 2trips n/a No 2 1.6 84 54.2 42.0 nla 0.41 1.00 83 53.5 606 School 2trips n/a No 2 1.0 65 67.0 32.5 78.4% 0.61 0.88 87 89.7 607 School 1 trip nta Yes 1 0.6 26 45.6 26.0 91.0% 0.27 0.68 28 49.1 611 School 3trips n/a n/a nla n/a 88 56.8 29.3 66.0% 0.38 0.61 618 School 2trips n/a No 2 1.7 144 61.0 36.0 81.0% 0.63 0.97 42 25.5 620 School 2trips n/a Yes 2 1.2 35 23.3 17.5 82.1% 0.21 0.30 31 26.5 621 School 3trips n/a Yes 3 1.3 173 136.2 57.7 57.4% 0.80 1.02 148 116.5 623 School Strips nta Yes 6 3.8 360 95.5 60.0 33.5% 0.75 1.09 309 82.0 624 School 2trips n/a Yes 2 0.9 37 42.5 18.5 90.5% 0.24 0.36 52 59.8 625 School 3trips n/a Yes 3 1.3 125 91.2 41.7 100.0% 0.61 0.81 124 97.6 626 School 2trips n/a Yes 2 0.8 56 66.7 28.0 69.8% 1.05 0.80 39 46.4 628 School 2trips n/a Yes 2 0.7 65 60.7 32.5 81.3% 0.54 0.57 46 622 629 School 4trips n/a Yes 4 1.9 133 60.5 33.3 57.7% 0.62 0.62 111 59.7 631 School 4trips n/a No 4 2.6 268 65.8 38.3 71.2% 0.48 0.77 196 76.6 634 School 4trips n/a nta n/a n/a 179 102.9 44.8 85.6% 0.95 1.15 638 School 3trips nta Yes 3 1.4 100 71.9 33.3 56.8% 0.56 0.73 68 48.9 641 School 2trips n/a Yes 2 1.0 28 29.5 14.0 51.8% 0.19 0.31 31 32.6 642 School Strips n/a No 6 3.9 160 47.8 26.7 100.0% 0.52 0.77 121 31.4 643 School 3trips n/a No 3 1.1 55 51.4 18.3 63.8% 0.41 0.50 50 46.7 646 School 9trips n/a Yes 9 6.9 248 45.9 31.0 53.9% 0.62 0.78 264 38.1 648 School 8 trips n/a Yes 8 3.8 169 44.5 21.1 58.1% 035 0.49 183 48.2 649 School Strips n/a No 5 3.1 106 35.5 21.2 n/a 0.33 0.41 106 34.2 650 School 7 trips n/a No 7 5.2 194 37.5 27.7 40.2% 0.53 0.69 203 38.7 651 School 2 trips nta No 2 1.0 32 32.0 16.0 54.2% 0.25 0.47 21 21.0 652 School 3 trips n/a Yes 3 1.3 121 96.8 40.3 39.1% 0.96 1.11 125 100.0 653 School 2 trips n/a No 2 1.6 58 36.3 29.0 75.7% 0.39 0.68 58 36.0 654 School 13trips nta Yes 13 5.1 424 82.5 32.6 61.1% 0.56 0.79 405 78.8 655 School 2trips n/a Yes 2 1.7 78 49.4 39.0 60.4% 0.73 1.02 69 41.8 657 School 8 trips n/a Yes 8 5.5 306 55.7 38.3 37.3% 0.50 0.78 306 55.7 658 School Strips n/a No 8 4.6 125 27.5 15.6 n/a 0.18 0.37 121 26.6 660 School 3trips n/a No 3 1.7 91 33.8 22.8 75.9% 0.38 0.57 67 40.1 662 School 3trips nta No 3 1.7 25 15.2 8.3 63.8% 0.12 0.18 27 16.4 663 School 3trips n/a No 3 1.9 45 23.7 15.0 63.1% 0.12 0.33 72 37.9 664 School 1 trip nta nla nfa nla 22 59.5 22.0 65.9% 0.20 0.29 667 School 4trips n/a Yes 4 2.7 90 33.0 22.5 n/a 0.20 0.45 73 26.7 668 School 4trips n/a Yes 4 2.3 97 44.5 24.3 n/a 0.30 0.57 84 37.0 669 School 3trips n/a Yes 3 2.8 81 30.3 27.0 nta 0.55 0.77 82 29.3 671 School 4 trips n/a Yes 4 2.8 123 44.7 30.8 53.1% 0.49 0.59 119 43.3 672 School 2trips n/a Yes 2 1.4 37 28.0 18.5 69.9% 0.35 0.46 52 38.5 675 School Strips n/a Yes 5 3.9 186 47.9 37.2 100.0% 0.49 0.94 182 46.9 676 School 4 trips n/a Yes 4 2.5 114 46.7 28.5 84.7% 0.36 0.55 117 47.4 679 School 2 trips n/a Yes 2 1.2 33 30.0 16.5 94.5% 0.30 0.54 43 35.0 680 School 2 trips n/a Yes 2 1.3 48 37.8 24.0 70.8% 0.40 0.48 40 31.5 681 School 2 trips n/a Yes 2 1.0 56 57.7 28.0 84.3% 0.44 0.71 45 46.4 682 School 4 trips n/a No 4 2.7 172 63.0 43.0 73.3% 0.61 1.08 166 60.8 684 School 3trips n/a Yes 3 2.3 94 40.2 31.3 36.0% 0.36 0.69 110 47.0 686 School 1 trip n/a nla n/a nla 35 74.5 35.0 18.5% 0.46 0.62 687 School 3trips n/a No 3 1.3 New service 81 64.8 688 School 2trips n/a No 2 1.8 51 28.8 25.5 81.9% 0.45 0.66 74 41.8 696 School 3trips n/a No 3 2.0 112 60.5 37.3 65.1% 0.53 0.88 141 70.1 800 Owl nta 30-60 Yes 12 16.0 382 23.5 31.8 66.0% 0.34 0.55 352 22.0 801 Owl n/a 30-60 Yes 12 22.7 416 18.5 34.7 64.4% 0.25 0.43 479 21.1 802 Owl n/a 60 Yes 11 5.4 118 22.1 10.7 60.2% 0.21 0.23 111 20.7 805 Owl nta 60 Yes 12 11.3 183 16.2 15.3 80.6% 0.17 0.29 197 17.5 840 Owl nfa 60 Yes 12 5.8 135 23.2 11.3 74.9% 0.17 0.26 141 24.3 851 Owl n/a 60 No 10 9.7 159 16.4 15.9 68.0% 0.17 0.28 156 16.1

B Transbay 20-65 n/a No 13 9.5 240 24.9 16.0 57.7% 0.29 0.44 275 29.1 c Transbay 15-30 n/a No 13 10.5 259 23.9 19.9 60.5% 0.36 0.51 295 28.2

CB Transbay 20-40 n/a No 8 7.3 180 24.5 22.5 50.1% 0.38 0.61 213 29.3 DA Transbay Jtrips each way n/a nla n/a n/a 22 5.1 3.7 21.7% 0.05 0.07 E Transbay 25-60 nta No 18 10.6 254 26.1 18.1 63.0% 0.39 0.55 280 26.5 F Transbay 30 30 No 78 80.6 3,185 39.7 40.8 63.3% 0.37 0.64 3,070 38.1

FS Transbay 20-60 n/a No 8 6.4 279 40.6 34.9 59.6% 0.49 0.71 312 48.6 G Transbay 17-60 nta No 10 10.8 329 30.2 32.9 52.8% 0.39 0.66 363 33.6 H Transbay 20-25 n/a No 18 21.2 569 28.8 33.5 47.2% 0.38 0.62 528 24.9 J Transbay 20-57 n/a No 14 11.9 445 42.8 34.2 56.4% 0.63 0.92 530 44.6 L Transbay 15-40 n/a Yes 22 26.2 664 29.1 34.9 45.3% 0.38 0.63 648 24.8

LA Transbay 15-30 n/a Yes 27 22.8 571 24.6 21.1 61.9% 0.34 0.50 494 21.7 LC Transbay 30-60 n/a Yes 3 5.0 60 11.9 20.0 50.1% 0.15 0.35 55 10.9 M Transbay 25-45 30-119 Yes 22 19.6 384 11.4 11.3 44.5% 0.15 0.22 302 15.4 NL Transbay 15-30 30 Yes 93 96.9 3,041 32.0 32.7 61.5% 0.33 0.55 2,795 28.8 NX Transbay 16-20 nta No 10 8.0 279 38.1 31.0 69.4% 0.35 0.58 280 34.9

NX1 Transbay 20 n/a No 7 5.4 217 39.5 31.0 45.0% 0.48 0.66 197 36.3 NX2 Transbay 15-25 n/a Yes 10 9.9 268 31.3 29.8 42.2% 0.40 0.54 292 29.6 NX3 Transbay 15-30 n/a Yes 13 13.5 312 23.5 26.0 58.6% 0.29 0.44 320 23.6

Page2of3

........... On Time Average : Average Aw._ _...., 'MaximUm Doily pet Trip Perionnance Load Factor ll ......... ........ , . (Pex/RevH~

41.5 100.0% 0.36 0.90 -1.2% -1.2% 43.5 69.3% 0.76 1.13 33.8% 33.8% 28.0 90.7% 0.28 0.73 7.7% 7.7%

Discontinued service n/a n/a 21.0 82.4% 0.35 0.58 -70.8% -58.3% 15.5 93.2% 0.27 0.48 -11.4% 13.6% 49.3 56.4% 0.74 1.02 -14.5% -14.5% 51.5 39.2% 0.88 1.34 -14.2% -14.2% 26.0 86.9% 0.43 0.64 40.5% 40.5% 41.3 100.0% 0.63 0.91 -0.8% 7.0% 19.5 63.2% 0.37 0.50 -30.4% -30.4% 23.0 72.1% 0.48 0.61 -29.2% 2.3% 27.8 66.3% 0.55 0.80 -16.5% -1.3% 49.0 84.0% 0.64 0.88 -26.9% 16.3%

Discontinued service n/a n/a 22.7 42.9% 0.44 0.61 -32.0% -32.0% 15.5 64.5% 0.21 0.37 10.7% 10.7% 20.2 100.0% 0.28 ' 0.53 -24.4% -34.2% 16.7 50.8% 0.34 0.43 -9.1% -9.1% 29.3 47.3% 0.64

' 0.78 6.5% -17.1%

22.9 63.2% 0.45 0.60 8.3% 8.3% 21.2 n/a 0.43 0.54 0.0% -3.5% 29.0 45.8% 0.58 0.68 4.6% 3.2% 10.5 84.2% 0.15 0.26 -34.4% -34.4% 41.7 46.8% 0.87 0.96 3.3% 3.3% 29.0 70.7% 0.49 0.87 0.0% -0.6% 31.2 51.8% 0.58 0.79 -4.5% -4.5% 34.5 60.2% 0.74 1.02 -11.5% -15.3% 38.3 37.8% 0.52 0.79 0.0% 0.0% 15.1 100.0% 0.20 0.40 -3.2% -3.2% 22.3 56.2% 0.42 0.58 -26.4% 18.6%

9.0 65.6% 0.14 0.25 8.0% 8.0% 24.0 89.7% 0.25 0.66 60.0% 60.0%

Discontinued service n/a n/a 18.3 n/a 0.21 0.42 -18.9% -18.9% 21.0 n/a 0.24 0.44 -13.4% -16.8% 27.3 n/a 0.38 0.60 1.2% -3.5% 29.8 67.5% 0.74 0.88 -3.3% -3.3% 26.0 78.8% 0.50 0.65 40.5% 37.4% 36.4 100.0% 0.41 0.76 -2.2% -2.2% 29.3 79.7% 0.43 0.67 2.6% 1.4% 21.5 85.4% 0.27 0.49 30.3% 16.5% 20.0 74.9% 0.42 0.52 -16.7% -16.7% 22.5 88.3% 0.36 0.66 -19.6% -19.6% 41.5 82.5% 0.60 1.06 -3.5% -3.5% 36.7 58.9% 0.54 0.88 17.0% 17.0%

Discontinued service n/a n/a 27.0 73.6% 0.80 0.60 n/a n/a 37.0 67.8% 0.58 0.85 45.1% 45.1% 47.0 72.3% 0.71 1.16 25.9% 15.9% 29.3 56.4% 0.30 0.49 -7.9% -6.1% 39.9 49.4% 0.40 0.64 15.1% 13.6% 10.1 47.6% 0.24 0.22 -5.9% -5.9% 16.4 77.6% 0.19 0.31 7.7% 7.7% 11.8 65.3% 0.18 0.27 4.4% 4.4% 15.6 59.6% 0.16 0.27 -1.9% -1.9% 21.2 57.2% 0.34 0.51 14.6% 16.8% 22.7 65.4% 0.37 0.56 13.9% 18.1% 26.6 61.6% 0.46 0.74 18.3% 19.5%

Discontinued service n/a n/a 15.6 53.8% 0.26 0.36 10.2% 1.6% 39.4 66.3% 0.35 0.65 -3.6% -4.1% 39.0 62.6% 0.62 0.88 11.8% 19.7% 36.3 50.0% 0.48 0.82 10.3% 11.4% 29.4 45.8% 0.44 0.72 -7.1% -13.5% 37.9 60.5% 0.63 0.97 19.1% 4.3% 29.5 46.9% 0.44 0.74 -2.4% -14.9% 18.3 55.6% 0.42 0.59 -13.5% -11.7% 18.3 45.8% 0.11 0.31 -8.3% -8.3% 13.7 49.1% 0.24 0.34 -21.4% 34.7% 30.1 66.2% 0.31 0.51 -8.1% -9.8% 28.0 70.3% 0.46 0.74 0.4% -8.4% 28.1 38.2% 0.64 0.76 -9.2% -7.9% 29.2 40.9% 0.61 0.80 9.0% -5.2% 24.6 61.0% 0.43 0.67 2.6% 0.7%

........... per Trip

-1.2% 33.8% 7.7%

n/a -41.7% -11.4% -14.5% -14.2% 40.5% -0.8% -30.4% -29.2% -16.5% 28.0%

n/a -32.0% 10.7% -24.4% -9.1% -5.4% 8.3% 0.0% 4.6%

-34.4% 3.3% 0.0% -4.5% -11.5% 0.0% -3.2% -1.8% 8.0% 60.0%

n/a -18.9% -13.4% 1.2% -3.3% 40.5% -2.2% 2.6% 30.3% -16.7% -19.6% -3.5% 17.0%

n/a n/a

45.1% 25.9% -7.9% 15.1% -5.9% 7.7% 4.4% -1.9% 32.2% 13.9% 18.3%

n/a -14.3% -3.6% 11.8% 10.3% -12.3% 10.6% -15.7% -13.5% -8.3% 21.5% -8.1% -9.7% -9.2% -1.9% -5.3%

SR 15-069

Attachment 2

On Time Ave,... ............. Load factor

n/a -12.2% -9.2% 24.6% -0.3% 3.7%

n/a n/a 1.4% -44.4% 11.1% 28.6% -1.0% -7.5% 5.6% 17.3% -3.7% 79.2% 0.0% 3.3% -6.5% -64.8% -9.3% -11.1% 8.6% -11.3% 12.9% 33.3%

n/a n/a -14.0% -21.4% 12.8% 10.5% 0.0% -46.2%

-13.0% -17.1% -6.6% 3.2% 5.1% 28.6% n/a 30.3%

5.6% 9.4% 30.0% -40.0% 7.7% -9.4% -5.0% 25.6% -9.3% 3.6%, -0.2% 1.4% 0.5% 4.0% n/a 11.1%

-19.7% 10.5% 1.9% 16.7%

26.7% 108.3% n/a n/a n/a 5.0% n/a -20.0% n/a -30.9%

14.4% 51.0% 8.8% 42.9% 0.0% -16.3% -5.0% 19.4% -9.2% -10.0% 4.2% 5.0% 4.0% -18.2% 9.2% -1.6% 23.0% 50.0%

nta n/a n/a n/a

-14.1% 28.9% 7.2% 34.0% -9.6% -11.8% -15.0% 60.0% -12.6% 14.3% -3.0% 11.8% -9.7% 5.9% -8.4% -5.9% -0.5% 17.2% 4.9% 2.8% 11.5% 21.1%

n/a n/a -9.2% -33.3% 2.9% -5.4% 3.1% 26.5% -2.7% 23.1% -1.4% 15.8% 4.1% 0.0% 1.6% 15.8% -6.3% 23.5% -4.3% -26.7% 4.6% 60.0% 4.7% -6.1% 0.9% 31.4% -6.8% 33.3% -1.2% 52.5% 2.4% 48.3%

A,. .... Uoxlmum ..... -10.0% 28.4% 7.4%

n/a -40.2% 60.0% 0.0%

22.9% 77.8% 12.3% -37.5% 7.0% 29.0% 14.3%

n/a -16.4% 19.4% -31.2% -14.0% 0.0% 22.4% 31.7% -1.4% -44.7% -13.5% 27.9% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 8.1% 1.8%

38.9% 100.0%

n/a -6.7% -22.8% -22.1% 49.2% 41.3% -19.1% 21.8% -9.3% 8.3% -7.0% -1.9% 27.5%

n/a n/a

28.8% 31.8% -10.9% 48.8% -4.3% 6.9% 3.8% -3.6% 15.9% 9.8% 21.3%

n/a -34.5% 1.6%

23.9% 24.2% 16.1% 5.4% 17.5% 18.0% -11.4% 54.5% -7.3% 27.6% 15.2% 48.1% 52.3%

211712015,4:36 PM

175

Weekdav

Peak :orr Peak Minority Revenoe Total Average Productivity ........... On Time Avenoga

A..._ Route Route Type

~: .. : .. Maximum Frequency Frequency Route' Tripe (Pax/RevHr) per Trip Performance Load factor Load Fact"'

NX4 Transbay 20-52 . nla No 11 14.8 343 23.7 31.2 49.9% 0.36 0.58 NXC Transbay 2trips nla No 2 3.4 33 9.8 16.5 21.7% 0.13 0.30

0 Transbay 10-30 60 Yes 63 66.2 1,887 29.7 30.0 56.0% 0.36 0.59 ox Transbay 10-30 nla Yes 21 21.5 611 30.0 29.1 36.1% 0.36 0.57 p Transbay 8-39 nla No 24 19.4 715 35.4 29.8 61.0% 0.64 0.81 s Transbay 15-45 nla Yes 11 16.9 246 16.1 22.4 51.3% 0.22 0.35

SB Transbay 20-55 nla Yes 14 21.0 454 24.3 34.9 53.8% 0.40 0.57 u Transbay 25-37 nla Yes 11 13.1 506 39.2 46.0 61.3% 0.59 0.78 v Transbay 10~30 nla No 23 24.4 725 30.3 31.5 48.7% 0.47 0.76 w Transbay 15-30 nla No 19 20.5 502 24.7 26.4 62.3% 0.41 0.67 z Transbay 2tripseachwa nla No 4 3.5 73 21.0 18.3 63.8% 0.20 0.34

TOTALS 5590 5327.9 183,545 35.3 33.0 64.5%

Page 3 ol3

: Average Productivity .......... On Timo Average Av.,.... Avonogo ' Dally 1.!':: Dal! •• IRid ... hiD

(PaxiRevHr) per Trip .. .,....... ... Load Factor ...... 365 24.7 33.2 57.4% 0.45 0.76 6.4% 24 7.1 12.0 42.8% 0.11 0.27 -27.3%

2,045 30.9 32.5 63.2% 0.39 0.65 8.4% 634 29.5 30.2 45.3% 0.50 0.74 3.8% 795 40.9 33.1 56.5% 0.68 0.88 11.2% 226 13.4 20.5 50.4% 0.33 0.53 ~8.1%

449 21.4 32.1 58.0% 0.58 0.82 ~1.1%

514 39.3 46.7 54.5% 0.62 0.81 1.6% 712 29.1 31.0 49.5% 0.48 0.78 ~1.8%

537 26.2 28.3 61.6% 0.46 0.75 7.0% 78 22.4 19.5 60.9% 0.28 0.51 6.8%

187,468 35.2 33.5 66.2% 2.1%

............ ty ........... (Pax/Re'IJ;Ir) per Trip

4.0% 6.4% -27.3% -27.3% 3.9% 8.4% -1.6% 3.8% 15.5% 11.2% ~16.8% ~8.1%

~11.8% ~8.1%

0.3% 1.6% -3.9% -1.8% 5.9% 7.0% 6.8% 6.8% -0.5% 1.7%

SR 15-069

Attachment 2

OtiTime Avenoga Performance Load factor

7.6% 25.0% 21.1% -15.4% 7.2% 8.3% 9.2% 38.9% -4.4% 6.3% ·0.8% 50.0% 4.2% 45.0% ~6.8% 5.1% 0.7% 2.1% -0.7% 12.2% -2.9% 40.0% 1.7%

A ...... Maximum

Load Factor 31.0% -10.0% 10.2% 29.8% 8.6% 51.4% 43.9% 3.8% 2.6% 11.9% 50.0%

2/17/2015, 4:36PM

176

Saturdav

Route Information Trips Ho.urs . 2013 E!f8cliven""". 2014 Effective"""" 2014 vo 2013 Comparison

Minority Revenue Total AV&f'11g& Pl'Qd"'cUvlty Paiaeng,rS on Time Average Av~n:&ge A .,.,age ProductMty ~engere On Time Average Average Average ,

Pn>dll<llvlty P~seniJera On Time Average Average Route Route Type Frequency Revenue [)ally M8xlrn,Um ,Qally. Maldmum Dally Maximum

Ro~1 Trips Hours Rldenhlo

(PaxiRevHr) per Trip Perfonnance LOJ;d Factor load FactOr . Rid8r$hJD. (Pax/RevHr) per Trip Perfonnance LoadF8Ctor Lo8d Factor Rfde"rshlo- (Pax/R~.~~ per Trip PerfQrmance Load Fattor Load FaCtor

1 Trunk 20 Yes 115 195.8 10,888 55.6 94.7 40.9% 0.53 0.79 8,623 44.0 75.0 37.5% 0.46 0.76 -20.8% -20.8% -20.8% -3.4% -13.2% -3.8% 1R Rapid 15 Yes 80 89.9 3,808 46.4 47.6 48.6% 0.33 0.52 4,251 47.3 53.1 54.3% 0.38 0.60 11.6% 1.9% 11.6% 5.7% 15.2% 15.4% 7 Suburban Crosstown 45 No 30 19.8 463 23.4 15.4 70.2% 0.22 0.43 340 17.2 11.3 82.1% 0.22 0.39 -26.5% -26.5% -26.5% 11.9% 0.0% -9.3%

11 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 28 13.8 274 19.9 9.8 86.6% 0.16 0.30 252 18.3 9.0 90.0% 0.12 0.23 -8.0% -8.0% ·8.0% 3.4% -25.0% -23.3% 12 Urban Crosstown 30 No 66 64.7 1,491 23.0 22.6 66.6% 0.31 0.55 1,528 23.6 23.2 66.1% 0.31 0.55 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% -0.5% 0.0% 0.0% 14 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 63 60.2 1,958 39.3 31.1 60.3% 0.28 0.54 2,043 33.9 32.4 74.3% 0.29 • 0.55 4.3% -13.6% 4.3% 14.1% 3.6% 1.9% 18 Trunk 20-30 Yes 105 146.2 5,536 37.8 52.7 62.3% 0.30 0.61 5,108 35.0 48.6 62.6% 0.30 0.58 -7.7% -7.6% -7.7% 0.3% 0.0% 4.9% 20 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 76 72.1 2,583 35.8 34.0 57.5% 0.26 0.45 2,513 34.8 33.1 57.0% 0.25

•

0.44 -2.7% -2.7% -2.7% -0.5% -3.8% -2.2% 21 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 58 56.6 1,467 25.9 25.3 71.2% 0.20 0.37 1,533 27.1 26.4 58.9% 0.22 0.40 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% -12.3% 10.0% 8.1% 22 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 36 35.5 977 27.5 27.1 88.4% 0.27 0.43 1,074 30.3 29.8 82.5% 0.28 0.46 9.9% 9.9% 9.9% -5.9% 3.7% 7.0% 25 Urban Crosstown 60 No 22 21.7 387 17.8 17.6 76.9% 0.24 0.41 371 17.1 16.9 71.8% 0.26 . 0.40 4.1% -4.1% 4.1% -5.1% 8.3% -2.4% 26 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 66 65.1 1,943 29.9 29.4 51.9% 0.21 0.41 1,902 29.2 28.8 53.8% 0.21 0.42 -2.1% -2.4% -2.1% 1.9% 0.0% 2.4% 31 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 66 32.6 743 22.8 11.3 81.9% 0.23 0.34 786 24.1 11.9 65.0% 0.25 0.37 5.8% 5.8% 5.8% -16.9% 8.7% 8.8% 32 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 27 26.6 463 17.4 17.1 64.6% 0.22 0.39 465 17.5 17.2 69.1% 0.23 0.39 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 4.5% 4.5% 0.0% 40 Trunk 15-30 Yes 130 127.5 5,825 45.7 44.8 65.1% 0.36 0.59 5,834 45.8 44.9 71.8% 0.34 0.55 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 6.7% -5.6% -6.8% 45 Urban Crosstown 40 Yes 50 49.0 1,084 22.1 21.7 79.9% 0.17 0.33 1,200 24.5 24.0 81.6% 0.17 0.35 10.7% 10.7% 10.7% 1.6% 0.0% 6.1% 49 Urban Crosstown 9-Feb No 38 49.4 1,282 25.9 33.7 70.9% 0.30 0.72 1,024 20.7 26.9 78.2% 0.25 0.56 -20.1% -20.0% -20.1% 7.3% -16.7% -22.2%

51 A Trunk 15-20 No 134 128.8 5,566 47.5 41.8 56.9% 0.35 0.62 5,968 46.3 44.5 70.4% 0.34 0.62 7.2% -2.5% 6.4% 13.5% -2.9% 0.0% 518 Trunk 15-60 No 135 109.5 6,223 65.6 46.4 51.8% 0.45 0.82 7,305 66.7 54.1 73.6% 0.44 0.84 17.4% 1.6% 16.5% 21.8% -2.2% 2.4% 52 Urban Crosstown 35 No 40 23.2 931 40.1 23.3 74.2% 0.32 0.40 827 35.7 20.7 64.9% 0.28 0.37 -11.2% -11.2% -11.2% -9.4% -12.5% -7.5% 54 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 48 23.4 738 35.5 15.4 64.1% 0.20 0.35 783 33.5 16.3 79.2% 0.22 0.38 6.1% -5.7% 6.1% 15.1% 10.0% 8.6% 57 Trunk 15-30 Yes 134 140.3 5,047 36.2 37.7 59.2% 0.29 0.50 5,373 38.3 40.1 67.7% 0.26 0.44 6.5% 5.9% 6.5% 8.5% -10.3% -12.0% 60 Suburban Crosstown 40 No 42 13.9 318 23.0 7.6 75.4% 0.09 0.16 269 19.4 6.4 76.4% 0.10 0.15 -15.4% -15.4% -15.4% 0.9% 11.1% -6.3% 62 Urban Crosstown Jan-00 Yes 76 64.4 2,058 36.7 27.4 59.3% 0.25 0.45 2,003 31.1 26.4 76.0% 0.24 0.44 -2.7% -15.3% -4.0% 16.8% -4.0% -2.2% 65 Suburban Crosstown 60 No 24 11.8 341 28.9 14.2 82.3% 0.35 0.57 294 24.9 12.3 86.8% 0.29 0.47 -13.8% -13.8% -13.8% 4.4% -17.1% -17.5% 67 Suburban Crosstown 14-Feb No 30 13.8 234 17.0 7.8 69.4% 0.15 0.27 202 14.7 6.7 73.4% 0.12 0.22 -13.8% -13.8% -13.8% 4.0% -20.0% -18.5% 68 Suburban Crosstown 60 nla nla n/a 113 10.5 10.3 86.2% 0.16 0.26 Discontinued service n/a nla nla nla nla nla 70 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 29 20.9 552 26.1 19.0 76.1% 0.28 0.41 549 26.2 18.9 68.1% 0.26 0.37 -0.5% 0.4% -0.5% -8.1% -7.1% -9.8% 71 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 30 37.3 650 17.6 21.7 83.3% 0.21 0.37 698 18.7 23.3 79.4% 0.23 0.37 7.4% 6.5% 7.4% -3.9% 9.5% 0.0% 72 Trunk 30-45 Yes 74 129.8 5,103 42.5 69.0 47.1% 0.50 0.89 5,523 42.6 74.6 58.2% 0.47 0.85 8.2% 0.2% 8.2% 11.1% -6.0% 4.5%

72M Trunk 30-40 Yes 73 117.4 4,226 38.8 57.9 47.2% 0.37 0.70 4,233 36.1 58.0 58.8% 0.35 0.67 0.2% -7.0% 0.2% 11.7% -5.4% 4.3% 73 Major Corridor 15-30 Yes 138 66.9 2,289 34.2 16.6 85.5% 0.19 0.34 2,542 38.0 18.4 88.7% 0.20 0.36 11.0% 11.1% 11.0% 3.2% 5.3% 5.9% 74 Urban Crosstown 35-70 Yes 47 39.2 478 12.3 10.6 65.0% 0.10 0.20 540 13.8 11.5 68.4% 0.10 0.21 13.0% 11.8% 8.2% 3.4% 0.0% 5.0% 76 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 54 54.0 1,600 29.7 29.6 65.4% 0.29 0.47 1,651 30.6 30.6 58.3% 0.29 0.46 3.2% 3.1% 3.2% -7.2% 0.0% -2.1% 85 Suburban Crosstown 60 Yes 26 25.8 607 21.5 23.3 61.2% 0.30 0.51 463 17.9 17.8 66.8% 0.21 0.38 -23.7% -16.7% -23.7% 5.6% -30.0% -25.5% 86 Suburban Crosstown 35 Yes 24 7.4 76 10.2 3.2 90.5% 0.07 0.11 91 12.2 3.8 72.0% 0.08 0.14 19.7% 19.7% 19.7% -18.6% 14.3% 27.3% 88 Major Corridor 30 Yes 68 50.6 1,442 28.5 21.2 70.9% 0.21 0.39 1,491 29.5 21.9 67.9% '0.21 0.37 3.4% 3.4% 3.4% -3.0% 0.0% -5.1% 89 Suburban Crosstown 60 Yes 25 35.9 569 17.1 22.8 61.2% 0.25 0.49 Discontinued service nla n/a nla nla n/a n/a 93 Suburban Crosstown 60 Yes 26 25.5 358 14.1 13.8 67.5% 0.19 0.33 313 12.3 12.0 70.6% 0.16 0.31 -12.6% -12.6% -12.6% 3.1% -15.8% --6.1% 95 Suburban Crosstown 33 Yes 44 12.0 213 17.8 4.8 79.9% 0.12 0.18 220 18.3 5.0 76.6% 0.11 0.16 3.3% 3.3% 3.3% -3.3% -8.3% -11.1% 97 Major Corridor 30 Yes 69 80.3 2,269 28.2 32.9 69.8% 0.23 0.38 2,529 31.5 36.7 75.7% 0.33 0.55 11.5% 11.9% 11.5% 5.9% 43.5% 44.7% 98 Urban Crosstown 40 Yes 44 29.1 739 25.4 16.8 71.2% 0.17 0.28 838 28.8 19.0 46.5% 0.18 0.29 13.4% 13.4% 13.4% -24.7% 5.9% 3.6% 99 Major Corridor 30-45 Yes 66 99.4 1,819 19.9 32.5 70.6% 0.34 0.54 2,567 25.8 38.9 67.7% 0.26 0.47 41.1% 29.8% 19.7% -2.8% -23.5% -13.0%

200 Suburban Crosstown 30 Yes 54 55.2 New service 972 17.6 18.0 68.2% 0.23 0.41 n/a nla n/a n/a nla n/a 210 Major Corridor 30 Yes 52 51.1 a32 I 16.3 1 16.o I 66.2% I 0.18 I 0.30 1,546 30.2 29.7 64.2% 0.25 0.49 85.8% 85.8% 85.8% -2.0% 38.9% 63.3% 212 Very Low Density 30 Yes 54 26.4 New service 554 21.0 10.3 69.1% 0.23 0.33 n/a nla n/a n/a nla nla 216 Very Low Density 60 Yes 26 24.8 New service 339 13.7 13.0 65.5% 0.16 0.35 n/a nla n/a nla nla n/a 217 Very Low Density 40 Yes 37 45.9 7231 15.9 I 19.51 62.5% I 0.34 I 0.53 1,538 33.5 41.6 56.5% 0.64 1.04 112.8% 110.4% 112.8% -6.0% 88.2% 96.2% 232 Very Low Density 60 Yes 26 25.6 New service 287 11.2 11.0 73.1% 0.16 0.27 n/a nla n/a nla nla n/a 242 Very Low Density 60 nla n/a n/a 312 13.2 12.5 59.3% 0.21 0.36 Discontinued service n/a nla nla nla nla n/a 251 Very Low Density 60 Yes 26 13.0 342 11.5 12.7 70.6% 0.20 0.34 101 I 7.81 3.91 72.5% I 0.05 I 0.10 -70.5% -32.4% -69.3% 2.0% -75.0% -70.6% 332 Very Low Density 60 nla n/a n/a 276 10.8 10.6 69.2% 0.15 0.28 Discontinued service nla n/a nla nla nla n/a 345 Very Low Density 60 n/a nla n/a 242 8.8 8.6 62.4% 0.15 0.27 Discontinued service nla n/a nla nla n/a nla 350 Very Low Density 60 n/a nla n/a 452 16.5 16.7 76.6% 0.26 0.39 Discontinued service nla n/a nla nla nla nla 376 Owl 30 Yes 15 27.5 280 10.5 18.7 58.0% 0.17 0.31 312 11.3 20.8 62.6% 0.15 0.31 11.4% 8.1% 11.4% 4.6% -11.8% 0.0% 386 Very Low Density 53 Yes 24 10.5 202 19.2 8.4 81.5% 0.19 0.31 215 20.4 9.0 73.0% 0.20 0.32 6.4% 6.4% 6.4% -8.5% 5.3% 3.2% 800 Owl 30-60 Yes 26 34.8 764 21.9 29.4 53.7% 0.29 0.48 814 23.4 31.3 44.6% 0.32 0.54 6.6% 6.9% 6.6% -9.1% 10.3% 12.5% 801 Owl 30-60 Yes 23 34.2 691 20.2 30.1 63.2% 0.25 0.39 779 22.8 33.9 46.4% 0.20 0.36 12.8% 12.8% 12.8% -16.8% -20.0% -7.7% 802 Owl 60 Yes 11 5.4 111 20.7 10.1 42.0% 0.11 0.21 92 17.2 8.4 39.7% 0.12 0.20 -17.1% -17.1% -17.1% -2.3% 9.1% -4.8% 805 Owl 60 Yes 12 11.3 168 14.9 14.0 72.4% 0.15 0.26 164 14.5 13.7 70.8% 0.17 0.27 -2.4% -2.4% -2.4% -1.6% 13.3% 3.8% 840 Owl 60 Yes 12 5.8 134 23.1 11.2 58.2% 0.18 0.28 133 22.9 11.1 50.1% 0.19 0.28 -0.7% -0.7% -0.7% -8.1% 5.6% 0.0% 851 Owl 60 No 10 9.7 155 16.0 15.5 53.7% 0.12 0.27 169 17.4 16.9 53.7% 0.17 0.30 9.0% 9.0% 9.0% 0.0% 41.7% 11.1% BSN Contract Shuttle 12 Yes 71 21.0 551 26.2 7.8 87.8% 0.21 0.24 544 25.9 7.7 81.4% 0.13 0.24 -1.3% -1.3% -1.3% --6.3% -39.1% 0.0%

F Transbay 30-60 No 71 70.1 2,876 41.1 40.5 52.1% 0.39 0.67 2,534 36.1 35.7 51.9% 0.35 0.58 -11.9% -12.1% -11.9% -0.2% -10.3% -13.4% NL Transbay 30 Yes 75 74.0 1,943 26.2 25.9 67.4% 0.30 0.49 1,822 24.6 24.3 64.5% 0.29 0.47 -6.2% -6.2% -6.2% -2.9% -3.3% -4.1% 0 Transbav 60 Yes 34 33.3 680 20.4 20.0 58.6% 0.25 0.41 639 19.2 18.8 60.2% 0.25 0.41 -6.0% -6.0% -6.0% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0%

TOTALS 3215 3066.2 97,465 32.7 30.9 62.6% 99,674 32.5 31.0 65.0% 2.3% -0.6% 0.5% 2.4%

Page 1 of 1 3/5/2015, 11 :34 AM

177

Route lilformation Trips Hours 2013 Effectiveness . 2014 EffeCtiveness . 2014 ve 2013 COmparison Minority ReVenue TQtal __ Average Prochietfvlty Pal8enger, On nrne Ava~ge

A.~rage- A~rage PfOdUetlvity Passengers 9nnm• Average A~rage AVerage P,rodue_U~ P8$sei'!Qera: Orillrile_ Averag., Av.erage

Route Route Type Frequency Route1 Trtpo

ReVenue Dally . (Pax/RevHr) per Trip Pi9:fqnnanee Load Faetot Mlixlmum Dally (PaxiROVHr) per Trip Per1or:tnance Load Factor Maximum Dally

(PaXlRev\1~ per'J:'rlp· Perform~nce Load Fa~k)r MaXimUm

'Jbirs Rfdershltt Loa(t"F8dor Rldiiiiobio Load Factor RfdershiD - Load factor 1 Trunk 20 Yes 115 195.8 7,993 40.8 69.5 56.6% 0.35 0.61 6,604 33.7 57.4 50.3% 0.34 0.58 -17.4% -17.4% -17.4% -6.3% -2.9% -4.9%

1R Rapid 15 Yes 80 82.0 3,426 41.7 42.8 59.6% 0.32 0.51 3,638 44.4 45.5 62.6% 0.34 0.53 6.2% 6.4% 6.2% 3.0% 6.3% 3.9% 7 Suburban Crosstown 45 No 30 19.8 316 16.0 10.5 84.9% 0.20 0.32 305 15.4 10.2 83.5% 0.18 0.31 -3.5% -3.5% -3.5% -1.3% -10.0% -3.1%

11 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 28 13.8 235 17.0 8.4 77.3% 0.14 0.25 214 15.5 7.6 87.4% 0.13 0.24 -8.9% -8.9% -8.9% 10.1% -7.1% -4.0% 12 Urban Crosstown 30 No 66 64.7 1,160 17.9 17.6 69.8% 0.24 0.42 921 14.2 14.0 72.1% 0.23 0.37 -20.6% -20.6% -20.6% 2.2% -4.2% -11.9% 14 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 63 50.7 1,627 32.6 25.8 69.8% 0.25 0.46 1,614 31.8 25.6 62.1% 0.24 0.44 -0.8% -2.4% -0.8% -7.7% -4.0% -4.3% 18 Trunk 20-30 Yes 104 143.8 4,331 30.1 41.6 69.4% 0.26 0.51 3,970 27.6 38.2 65.0% 0.24 0.47 -8.3% -8.2% -8.3% -4.4% -7.7% -7.8% 20 Major Corridor 30 Yes 76 72.1 1,916 26.6 25.2 67.4% 0.20 0.36 2,026 28.1 26.7 71.8% 0.20 0.37 5.7% 5.7% 5.7% 4.4% 0.0% 2.8% 21 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 58 56.6 1,036 18.3 17.9 79.2% 0.16 0.29 1,150 20.3 19.8 68.4% 0.17 0.31 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% -10.7% 6.3% 6.9% 22 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 36 35.5 713 20.1 19.8 85.1% 0.20 0.34 752 21.2 20.9 89.6% 0.20 0.35 5.5% 5.5% 5.5% 4.5% 0.0% 2.9% 25 Urban Crosstown 60 No 22 21.7 300 13.8 13.6 72.8% 0.20 0.34 266 12.2 12.1 73.6% 0.18 0.30 -11.3% -11.3% -11.3% 0.9% -10.0% -11.8% 26 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 66 65.1 1,434 22.1 21.7 66.7% 0.18 0.36 1,608 24.7 24.4 66.1% 0.18 0.35 12.1% 11.8% 12.1% -0.6% 0.0% -2.8% 31 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 66 32.6 626 19.2 9.5 84.4% 0.23 0.29 587 18.0 8.9 68.4% 0.21 0.29 -6.2% -6.2% -6.2% -16.0% -8.7% 0.0% 32 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 27 26.6 467 17.5 17.3 70.2% 0.27 0.43 336 12.6 12.4 81.0% 0.16 0.29 -28.1% -28.1% -28.1% 10.8% -40.7% -32.6% 40 Trunk 15-30 Yes 131 121.7 4,719 38.8 36.0 74.4% 0.28 0.47 4,682 38.5 35.7 67.6% 0.26 0.42 -0.8% -0.8% -0.8% -6.9% -7.1% -10.6% 45 Urban Crosstown 40 Yes 50 49.0 865 17.7 17.3 81.2% 0.14 0.28 913 18.6 18.3 79.5% 0.14 0.28 5.5% 5.5% 5.5% -1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 49 Urban Crosstown 9-Feb No 38 49.4 908 18.4 23.9 71.7% 0.21 0.50 741 15.0 19.5 77.9% 0.19 0.44 -18.4% -18.3% -18.4% 6.2% -9.5% -12.0%

51 A Trunk 15-20 No 133 117.1 4,447 38.0 33.4 66.8% 0.28 0.51 4,537 38.7 34.1 69.7% 0.27 0.50 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.9% -3.6% -2.0% 518 Trunk 15-60 No 134 94.3 4,697 49.5 35.1 63.9% 0.34 0.63 5,343 56.7 39.9 71.7% 0.32 0.63 13.7% 14.3% 13.7% 7.8% -5.9% 0.0% 52 Urban Crosstown 35 No 40 23.7 746 31.5 18.7 74.8% 0.19 0.34 700 29.6 17.5 70.6% 0.18 0.32 -6.2% -6.2% -6.2% -4.2% -5.3% -5.9% 54 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 48 20.0 542 26.1 11.3 74.1% 0.15 0.28 575 28.7 12.0 70.5% 0.15 0.29 6.1% 10.1% 6.1% -3.6% 0.0% 3.6% 57 Trunk 15-30 Yes 134 140.3 3,776 27.1 28.2 67.7% 0.22 0.38 4,301 30.7 32.1 73.8% 0.20 0.34 13.9% 13.4% 13.9% 6.1% -9.1% -10.5% 60 Suburban Crosstown 40 No 42 13.9 217 15.7 5.2 72.5% 0.11 0.15 212 15.3 5.0 84.6% 0.08 0.12 -2.2% -2.2% -2.2% 12.2% -27.3% -20.0% 62 Urban Crosstown Jan-00 Yes 75 55.8 1,805 32.2 24.1 71.3% 0.24 0.42 1,664 29.8 22.2 72.9% 0.21 0.39 -7.8% -7.4% -7.8% 1.7% -12.5% -7.1% 65 Suburban Crosstown 60 No 24 11.8 253 21.4 10.5 69.0% 0.25 0.41 237 20.1 9.9 84.7% 0.24 0.37 -6.3%, -6.3% -6.3% 15.7% -4.0% -9.8% 67 Major Corridor 14-Feb No 30 13.8 248 18.1 8.3 85.9% 0.17 0.28 220 16.0 7.3 75.5% 0.14 0.23 -11.4% -11.4% -11.4% -10.4% -17.6% -17.9% 68 n/a 60 nla nla n/a 105 9.8 9.6 89.3% 0.17 0.26 Discontinued service n/a nla nla nla n/a nla 70 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 29 20.9 477 22.6 16.4 74.1% 0.22 0.33 469 22.4 16.2 65.4% 0.23 0.33 -1.7% -0.7% -1.7% -8.7% 4.5% 0.0% 71 Urban Crosstown 60 Yes 30 37.3 540 14.6 18.0 81.7% 0.18 0.31 547 14.7 18.2 73.6% 0.17 0.31 1.3% 0.4% 1.3% -8.1% -5.6% 0.0% 72 Trunk 30-45 Yes 74 120.1 4,292 35.7 58.0 62.7% 0.39 0.71 4,229 35.2 57.1 67.5% 0.37 0.69 -1.5% -1.5% -1.5% 4.8% -5.1% -2.8%

72M Trunk 30-40 Yes 73 109.0 3,473 31.9 47.6 64.3% 0.30 0.59 3,561 32.7 48.8 66.7% 0.30 0.58 2.5% 2.3% 2.5% 2.4% 0.0% -1.7% 73 Major Corridor 15-30 Yes 138 66.9 1,885 28.2 13.7 84.9% 0.16 0.28 2,100 31.4 15.2 84.9% 0.17 0.30 11.4% 11.5% 11.4% 0.0% 6.3% 7.1% 74 Urban Crosstown 35-70 Yes 47 39.2 439 11.3 9.8 75.0% 0.09 0.19 501 12.8 10.7 74.7% 0.09 0.19 14.1% 13.0% 9.3% -0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 76 Urban Crosstown 30 Yes 54 54.0 1,293 24.0 23.9 77.0% 0.24 0.39 1,335 24.7 24.7 64.9% 0.24 0.40 3.2% 3.1% 3.2% -12.1% 0.0% 2.6% 85 Suburban Crosstown 60 Yes 26 25.8 475 16.9 18.3 70.6% 0.23 0.39 352 13.6 13.5 67.4% 0.18 0.31 -25.9% -19.1% -25.9% -3.3% -21.7% -20.5% 86 Suburban Crosstown 35 Yes 24 7.4 87 11.7 3.6 91.3% 0.08 0.11 72 9.7 3.0 75.1% 0.07 0.11 -17.4% -17.4% -17.4% -16.3% -12.5% 0.0% 88 Major Corridor 30 Yes 68 50.7 1,240 24.4 18.2 79.2% 0.18 0.33 1,168 23.0 17.2 66.4% 0.18 0.32 -5.8% -5.4% -5.8% -12.7% 0.0% -3.0% 89 Suburban Crosstown 60 Yes 25 35.9 421 12.6 16.8 69.4% 0.22 0.42 457 12.7 18.3 72.8% 0.21 0.41 8.6% 1.2% 8.6% 3.5% -4.5% -2.4% 93 Suburban Crosstown 60 Yes 26 25.5 341 13.4 13.1 76.5% 0.17 0.32 320 12.6 12.3 82.2% 0.16 0.29 -6.2% -6.2% -6.2% 5.7% -5.9% -9.4% 95 Suburban Crosstown 33 Yes 44 12.0 179 14.9 4.1 64.8% 0.09 0.14 157 13.0 3.6 76.1% 0.08 0.13 -12.6% -12.6% -12.6% 11.3% -11.1% -7.1% 97 Major Corridor 30 Yes 69 80.3 1,776 22.1 25.7 77.4% 0.20 0.32 1,969 24.5 28.5 89.5% 0.26 0.44 10.9% 11.2% 10.9% 12.0% 30.0% 37.5% 98 Urban Crosstown 40 Yes 44 29.1 595 20.5 13.5 74.2% 0.14 0.24 596 20.5 13.5 67.9% 0.13 0.23 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% -6.4% -7.1% -4.2% 99 Major Corridor 40 Yes 67 99.5 1,540 16.8 27.5 74.4% 0.26 0.41 1,985 20.0 29.6 72.8% 0.22 0.37 28.9% 18.5% 7.7% -1.5% -15.4% -9.8%

200 Suburban Crosstown 30 Yes 54 55.0 New service 801 14.6 14.8 70.2% 0.16 0.29 n/a nla n/a nla nla n/a 210 Major Corridor 30 Yes 52 51.1 7981 15.61 15.3 I 75.2% I 0.20 I 0.33 1,175 23.0 22.6 71.8% 0.20 0.38 47.2% 47.2% 47.2% -3.4% 0.0% 15.2% 212 Very Low Density 30 Yes 54 26.6 New service 436 16.4 8.1 74.3% 0.16 0.24 n/a nla n/a n/a nla n/a 216 Very Low Density 60 Yes 26 24.8 New service 276 11.2 10.6 57.6% 0.14 0.31 n/a nla nla n/a n/a n/a 217 Very Low Density 40 Yes 37 46.0 4751 10.3 1 12.a I 68.6% I 0.26 I 0.37 1,073 23.3 29.0 64.3% 0.40 0.63 125.9% 125.6% 125.9% -4.3% 53.8% 70.3% 232 Very Low Density 60 Yes 26 25.9 New service 284 11.0 10.9 84.7% 0.14 0.25 nla nla nla n/a nla n/a 242 n/a n/a nla n/a n/a 258 10.1 10.3 67.9% 0.17 0.31 Discontinued service nla nla nla n/a nla n/a 251 Very Low Density 60 Yes 26 13.3 278 9.8 10.3 73.1% 0.16 0.27 a9 I 6.71 3.41 75.6% I 0.06 I 0.10 -68.0% -31.9% -66.8% 2.5% -62.5% -63.0% 332 n/a n/a nla n/a n/a 250 9.6 9.6 74.4% 0.16 0.27 Discontinued service nla nla nla nla nla n/a 345 n/a n/a nla nla n/a 247 8.9 8.8 71.7% 0.14 0.24 Discontinued service nla n/a nla n/a nla n/a 350 n/a n/a n/a nla n/a 374 13.3 13.9 79.0% 0.20 0.35 Discontinued service nla n/a n/a nla nla n/a 376 Owl 30 Yes 15 27.5 233 8.7 15.5 65.6% 0.14 0.27 248 9.0 16.5 63.6% 0.13 0.27 6.4% 3.2% 6.4% -2.0% -7.1% 0.0% 386 Very Low Density 53 Yes 24 10.5 192 18.2 8.0 88.8% 0.19 0.30 179 17.0 7.5 83.0% 0.17 0.28 -6.8% -6.8% -6.8% -5.8% -10.5% -6.7% 800 Owl 30-60 Yes 30 39.2 723 18.4 24.1 57.4% 0.24 0.42 688 17.6 22.9 50.7% 0.26 0.41 -4.8% -4.5% -4.8% -6.7% 8.3% -2.4% 801 Owl 30-60 Yes 24 35.8 720 20.1 30.0 62.3% 0.18 0.33 779 21.8 32.5 57.3% 0.34 0.57 8.2% 8.4% 8.2% -5.0% 88.9% 72.7% 802 Owl 60 Yes 11 5.4 110 20.6 10.0 57.3% 0.11 0.21 96 17.9 8.7 52.9% 0.12 0.21 -12.7% -12.7% -12.7% -4.4% 9.1% 0.0% 805 Owl 60 Yes 12 11.3 159 14.1 13.3 70.6% 0.15 0.26 168 14.9 14.0 79.6% 0.16 0.27 5.7% 5.7% 5.7% 9.0% 6.7% 3.8% 840 Owl 60 Yes 12 5.8 124 21.3 10.3 65.4% 0.17 0.26 125 21.5 10.4 63.2% 0.17 0.24 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% -2.1% 0.0% -7.7% 851 Owl 60 No 10 9.7 122 12.6 12.2 60.2% 0.13 0.23 123 12.7 12.3 68.7% 0.14 0.24 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 8.4% 7.7% 4.3%

F Transbay 30-60 No 71 70.1 2,199 31.4 31.0 61.7% 0.33 0.53 2,079 29.6 29.3 65.0% 0.27 0.46 -5.5% -5.7% -5.5% 3.3% -18.2% -13.2% NL Transbay 30 Yes 75 74.0 1,634 22.1 21.8 72.4% 0.26 0.42 1,518 20.5 20.2 72.2% 0.26 0.41 -7.1% -7.1% -7.1% -0.2% 0.0% -2.4% 0 Transbay 60 Yes 34 33.3 486 14.6 14.3 72.9% 0.19 0.31 523 15.7 15.4 78.3% 0.21 0.34 7.6% 7.6% 7.6% 5.3% 10.5% 9.7%

TOTALS 3147 2970.2 77,344 26.1 25.0 70.2% 78,594 26.5 25.0 69.7% 1.6% 1.3% -0.2% -0.5%

Page 1 of 1 3/5/2015, 11:35AM

178

Service Type Analysis

Service Type

Rapid

Trunk (Trunk/MC)

Local (Urban/Suburban)

Community (VLD, Feeder)

Supplementary

Owl

Transbay

Trips

265 379.9

1,659 1,906.4

2,284 1,883.8

531 351.9

177 106.3

84 99.0

590 600.6

16,974

82,330

54,751

8,956

5,065

1,763

17,629

9.1%

43.9%

29.2%

4.8%

2.7%

0.9%

9.4%

44.7

43.2

29.1

25.5

47.6

17.8

29.4

64.1

49.6

24.0

16.9

28.6

21.0

29.9

265 364.6

1,618 1,790.2

2,222 1,783.2

591 445.1

188 110.7

84 98.1

597 600.8

7.0% 17,107

34.5% 79,241

34.3% 52,715

8.6% 9,481

2.1% 5,651

1.9% 1,697

11.6% 17,653

9.3%

43.2%

28.7%

5.2%

3.1%

0.9%

9.6%

46.9

44.3

29.6

21.3

51.1

17.3

29.4

64.6

49.0

23.7

16.0

30.1

20.2

29.6

SR 15-069

Attachment 3

0.0% 4.2% -0.8%

2.5% 6.5% 3.9%

2.8% 5.6% 3.9%

-10.2% -20.9% -5.5%

-5.9% -3.9% -10.4%

0.0% 0.9% 3.9%

-1.2% 0.0% -0.1%

4.8% -0.8%

-2.4% 1.3%

-1.7% 1.0%

19.5% 5.1%

-6.7% 4.8%

2.9% 3.9%

-0.1% 1.0%

Totals I 5590 5327.9 0.0% 187,468 100.0% 35.2 33.51 5,565 5,192.6 100.0% 183,545 100.0% 35.3 33.0 0.4% 2.6% 2.1% -0.5% 1.7%

Rapid

Trunk (Trunk/MC)

Local (Urban/Suburban)

Community (VLD, Feeder)

Owl

Transbay

80 89.9

1 ,293 1 ,443.4

1,289 1,059.7

264 167.1

109 128.7

180 177.4

4,251

58,642

25,745

3,578

2,464

4,995

4.3%

58.8%

25.8%

3.6%

2.5%

5.0%

47.3

40.6

24.3

21.4

19.1

28.2

53.1

45.4

20.0

13.6

22.6

27.8

80 82.0

1,281 1,391.0

1,243 993.0

265 210.8

109 128.0

180 177.3

2.8% 3,808

46.6% 57,065

33.3% 25,690

7.1% 3,100

4.3% 2,303

5.9% 5,499

3.9%

58.5%

26.4%

3.2%

2.4%

5.6%

46.4

41.0

25.9

14.7

18.0

31.0

47.6

44.5

20.7

11.7

21.1

30.6

0.0% 9.5% 11.6% 1.9% 11.6%

0.9% 3.8% 2.8% -1.0% 1.8%

3.7% 6.7% 0.2% -6.1% -3.4%

-0.4% -20.7% 15.4% 45.6% 15.9%

0.0% 0.6% 7.0% 6.4% 7.0%

0.0% 0.1% -9.2% -9.2% -9.2%

Totals I 3215 3066.2 0.0% 99,675 100.0% 32.5 31.0 I 3,158 ~,982.0 100.0% 97,465 100.0% 32.7 30.9 1.8% 2.8% 2.3% -0.5% 0.5%

Rapid

Trunk (Trunk/MC)

Local (Urban/Suburban)

Community (VLD, Feeder)

Owl

Transbay

80 82.0

1,398 1,476.5

1 '182 952.6

193 147.0

. 114 134.6

180 177.4

3,638

47,870

18,401

2,337

2,228

4,120

4.6%

60.9%

23.4%

3.0%

2.8%

5.2%

44.4

32.4

19.3

15.9

16.6

23.2

45.5

34.2

15.6

12.1

19.5

22.9

80 82.2

1,281 1,382.9

1,243 993.6

194 192.1

114 134.0

180 177.3

2.8% 3,426

46.7% 47,132

33.5% 18,202

6.5% 2,074

4.5% 2,191

6.0% 4,319

4.4%

60.9%

23.5%

2.7%

2.8%

5.6%

41.7

34.1

18.3

10.8

16.4

24.4

42.8

36.8

14.6

10.7

19.2

24.0

0.0% -0.2% 6.2%

9.1% 6.8% 1.6%

4.9% 4.1% 1.1%

-0.5% -23.5% 12.7%

0.0% 0.5% 1.7%

0.0% 0.1% 4.6%

6.4% 6.2%

4.9% -6.9%

5.4% 6.3%

47.3% 13.3%

1.2% 1.7%

4.7% 4.6%

Totals I 3147 2970.1 0.0% 78,594 100.0% 26.5 25.0 I 3,092 2,962.0 100.0% 77,344 100.0% 26.1 25.0 1.8% 0.3% 1.6% 1.3% -0.2%

Page 1 of 1 Produced on: 2/17/2015,4:35 PM