i. Background 2

ii. Acknowledgments 4

I. Mission 8

II. Guiding Principles 9

III. SWOT Analysis 10

IV. Market Analysis 42

V. Target Markets 53

VI. Regional TDM Marketing 84

VII. Tracking and Evaluation 91

Why was this plan created?

This plan was created in response to a desire to coordinate marketing efforts for alternative transportation in Southern California. This working plan is consistent with the Caltrans' Statewide Strategic Marketing Plan and is eligible for funds from Caltrans Office of Traffic Demand Management for regional marketing activities. The Statewide Strategic Marketing Plan policies are as follows:

Partnerships

Marketing activities must be developed in partnership with other transportation providers and related agencies in the region to promote an intermodal system and maximize marketing effectiveness, while recognizing the reality of the various services' availability and accessibility in the region.

Consumer Information System

A regional consumer information system must be established and/or maintained that provides convenient, quick, and complete answers to consumers when they respond to a call-to-action from a campaign.

Research and Evaluation

Consumer research must be utilized to identify specific, target audiences to be approached via messages tailored to those consumers most likely to sample or repeat use of the product being promoted. Evaluation of each marketing activity must be conducted as part of that activity in order to determine its effectiveness and continually improve future marketing activities.

Creative Umbrella

Creative elements in all activities and campaigns must have a clear call-to-action.

What is this plan all about?

A strategic process for marketing transportation alternatives in Southern California--that's what this plan is about. As depicted on the following page, the RPM began with research which indicates "who is the audience and what do they want?" The RPM then reviewed the products available to meet the consumers' needs and desires. Based on those findings, marketing activities were developed, along with recommended product enhancements or additional consumer research. Finally, the RPM proposes to evaluate the marketing activities in order to improve the transportation products and enhance future marketing efforts.

Who was involved in creating the plan?

The Southern California region is comprised of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura counties. A regional partnership, called the Southern California Regional Partnership for Marketing (RPM) was formed with representatives from Caltrans District Offices, regional planning agencies, transit and rail agencies, transportation management associations, and other transportation service providers, working in cooperation to develop and promote marketing strategies for alternative transportation. Participants are identified and acknowledged on the following pages.

How will it be used?

This plan is a strategic planning document for use by Southern California transportation providers. It is dynamic, to be added to and modified over time as needed by the regional partnership. It sets out guidelines for the marketing activities within the plan and for evaluating those activities. And as described above, it gives Caltrans OTDM a context for evaluating allocation of funds, by demonstrating consistency with their Statewide Strategic Marketing Plan policies.

A brief summary.

The Southern California RPM met on a regular basis over the past year to develop this plan for coordinating regional marketing efforts. The RPM formulated the mission statement and guiding principles to focus their goals and determine their target audience(s) for marketing activities. An analysis of the region's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for alternative transportation was completed, based on available consumer research, products, capacity, placement, and pricing of alternative transportation in the region. Additionally, the RPM created an approach to strategic marketing which includes very targeted geographic- and mode-specific marketing activities as well as broader regional marketing activities.

The targeted marketing approach is described in detail in the Section "Target Markets." Four target areas were identified for mode-specific promotions based on a series of criteria--from congested corridors to employment density to existing marketing agents to availability of products that are competitive with driving alone. These four target areas are: Beverly Hills/Century City; Irvine; Tri-cities (Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena); and Van Nuys. Pages 53 through 80 describe proposed marketing in these areas.

The regional marketing activities relate to marketing products and services that impact a broader geographic and modal audience. Described on pages 81 through 83, the regional marketing activities include training and promotion for a transportation internet page and consumer research related to product enhancement/marketing research for ATIS systems including 800 COMMUTE, the internet page, and the RideGuide.

The plan also includes an evaluation component which responds to Caltrans strategic marketing policies. Because the activities have not yet been conducted, this section generally outlines the agreed-upon approach for evaluation of marketing activities.

Phil Aker Supervising Transportation Planner

Los Angeles Department of Transportation

Deborah Barmack Director of Management Services

San Bernardino Associated Governments

Walter Birdsong Manager, Teleservices

Southern California Rideshare

Eva Bitar Transportation Planning Associate

Los Angeles Department of Transportation

Terry Blank Senior Transportation Planner

Caltrans District 7

Adrienne Brooks-Taylor Regional Coordinator

Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Joan Danfifer Community Relations Representative

Riverside Transit Agency

Richard Doyle Chief

Caltrans District 7

Luz Echavarria Transportation Planning Associate

Los Angeles Department of Transportation

Malu Egenes Pass Sales Coordinator Foothill Transit

Dilara El-Assad Assistant Planner

Southern California Associated Governments

Barbara Gossett Associate Transportation Planner Caltrans District 12

Linda Grimes Senior Transportation Planner

Caltrans District 8

Monica Hall Office Manager

Mid-Valley Chamber of Commerce

John Harris Principal Transportation Engineer

City of Irvine

Gary Hewitt Administrative Associate

Glendale Beeline

Peter Hidalgo Director of Public Affairs/Media Relations

Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Nancy Hoffman Executive Vice-President

Mid Valley Chamber of Commerce

Sheila Irani Director of Marketing

Southern California Rideshare

Valerie Kennedy Assistant Director

Westside TMA

Michelle Kirkhoff Advanced Transportation Specialist

San Bernardino Associated Governments

Ellie Knapp Employee Rideshare Coordinator

City of Burbank

Michael Leasher Executive Director

Burbank City Centre TMA

Bill Lundgren Transportation Administrator

City of Burbank

Judi Masuda Transportation Planner

City of Pasadena Public Works

Teresa Milliken Account Executive

Southern California Rideshare

Margaret Moilove Caltrans District 7

Michelle Mowery Bicycle Coordinator

Los Angeles Department of Transportation

Jim McCarthy Storm Water Coordinator

Caltrans District 7

Steve McCaughey Executive Director

Irvine Spectrum TMA

Claudia Owens Executive Director Westside TMA

Betsy Patterson TMO Director

West Hollywood TMO

Stefan Pollack Director of Marketing Services

Century City Chamber

Pat Reid Public Information Officer

Caltrans District 7, Public/Media Affairs

Scott Richardson Marketing Manager

Riverside Transit Agency

Cynthia Schabarum Business Outreach Coordinator Foothill Transit

Jim Sims President

Southern California Rideshare

Linda Somilleda Program Director

Mid-Valley TMA

Susan Soto* Foothill Transit

Joseph Stitcher Senior Administrative Analyst

Santa Monica Bus Lines

Minh O. Thai Program Manager

Glendale TMA

Roberta Tinajero* Commuter Transportation Services

Debra Varnado Principal Planner

Southern California Associated Governments

Bill Wells Executive Director

Pasadena TMA

J. J. Weston Executive Director

Burbank Media District TMO

Priscilla Williams Associate Administrator

Caltrans District 8

Wendy Williams Director of Marketing

Omnitrans

* No longer at this position

For employers (CEOs)

• The packaging is critical--we have to have a great package to send out.
• We have to prove it benefits them--e.g. provides employee benefits without costing the business a lot.
• We have to go to them--they won't come to us.
• They have no time for meetings.

Don't call them "smaller" employers--it's offensive

However, we want to keep in mind that the goal is to reach the employees--the commuters-- with our messages: that may mean reaching the CEOs to distribute information, or it may mean bypassing the executives altogether and finding other ways to communicate with the employees.

All marketing activities and materials produced must succinctly and specifically identify the trip (origin and destination with mode(s)).

Regulated employers (100+ employees) are a secondary market.Introduction

This section provides a detailed review of the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats for Transportation Demand Management in the Southern California region. First, the available consumer research is summarized, providing information about specific alternative transportation products in Southern California, or about behaviors and attitudes towards alternative transportation. Then a review of the region's alternative transportation products is given. Using this information, the various transportation related agencies in Southern California assessed the region's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. When the available products are reviewed in light of consumer research and the local experts assessment, the viability of the various alternative transportation products is more clearly defined and can be better marketed.

Consumer Research

In order to design an effective marketing plan, we must first identify our target audience--their commuting behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions about transportation and commuting modes. Following are pertinent highlights from available consumer research conducted from 1991 - 1995 by the regional marketing partners as noted.

The deliberate inclusion of each of these summaries in the marketing plan serves a consistent purpose: to help us develop and refine effective marketing strategies, as well as marketable transportation products that consumers desire and will use.

Not each piece of research will be relevant to each marketing promotion identified in this plan or in future editions of a regional plan. However, all available consumer research is summarized as a resource for the regional partnership.

Differences in report conclusions do not signify competing or contradictory results. Rather, they indicate differences in each research projects' scope, objectives and methodology.

Some research projects are conducted to tell a story a while others are conducted to give advice. Each study is designed to evaluate marketing products and promotions with a goal of conducting increasingly effective campaigns and creating increasingly desirable products (they "give advice").

If there are differences with respect to a product or the persuasiveness of various messages, these differences will be reviewed and a determination of relevancy and usefulness made at the time of the detailed promotional planning. If further research is necessary, it will be recommended.JUNE 1995

Metrolink On-Board Rider Survey

Topline Report

This study focused on consumer behavior, satisfaction, product enhancements, and marketing opportunities for the future. The sample included 5400 Metrolink customers surveyed by mail and during peak commute hours. A summary of key findings:

• 81% believe they are receiving a better value on Metrolink than their former commute mode.
• 84% of Metrolink's customers surveyed use the train as a commuter service to and from work.
• 61% of Metrolink customers use the train to replace driving alone in their cars every day
• 76% of Metrolink customers find the arrival time of their train "ideal"
• System wide customer satisfaction was rated an 8.3 out of 10.
• 69% are purchasing monthly passes

Service Area

• 46% of customers live within five miles of their station of origin
• 54% live five or more miles to their station
• 24% live beyond ten miles
• Public transportation is the dominant means to get from passengers' destination station to their final destination
  • 39% ride the Red Line
  • 22% ride the bus
  • 12% utilize employer shuttles
  • 11% walk

What Passengers Like Most About Metrolink

• 27% avoid driving
• 19% less stress/relaxing
• 9% report convenience

MAY 1995 (From Data Collected In The Fall Of 1992)

Caltrans Consumer Segmentation Research, Phase I

Summary Of Key Findings

The primary purpose of the research was to determine within the target consumer market those who would be most likely to try alternatives to driving alone.

Target Markets

• Younger
• Single
• Ethnically diverse
• Lower socio-economic strata (education, occupation and income such as student and entry-level service type workers).

Despite target markets' desire to use alternative modes, the actual usage is minimal. (This reinforces previous findings that current alternatives do not meet consumer needs and expectations).

• Target markets are willing to relinquish responsibility for their commute in part because their lifestyle may allow a change.

• Non-target markets tend to be of a higher socio-economic group (based on education, occupation and income), but not exclusively those factors.

Summary of Findings

• 44% of drive alone commuters are "extremely" or "very" likely to use alternative modes of transportation.

Of that 44%:

• 23% are likely to use carpools
• 12% say they are likely to use vanpools
• 12% say they are likely to use a public bus
• 11% say they are likely to bike to work or school
• 10% say they are likely to try light rail
• 8% say they are likely to try a train

• Consumers' desire for alternatives exceeds their expectations of the existing product lines. Drive alone commuters are more willing to try some alternative mode of transportation than more conventional modes such as carpools, vanpools, buses, etc.

• Commuters who are willing to try alternatives are different - both demographically and psychographically - from those who are not.

1994

State Of The Commute Report

Commuter Transportation Services, Inc.

The purpose of the study was to examine the commute behavior and attitudes of commuters working in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties. Results are based on 2,625 completed surveys.

CARPOOLS

Average 2.6 members per carpool, traveling an average distance of 18 miles to work.

• Co-workers are the single most common group of carpool companions (47%).
• Sites with 100 or more employees: 56% of carpools made up of co-workers
• Sites with less than 100 employees: 40% of carpools are made up of co-workers

Family members are second most common group of carpool companions (39%)

Characteristics of those most likely to carpool:

• employees of aerospace firms
• sites with 100 or more employees
• those with household incomes less than $20,000 annually
• individuals less than 20 years of age

VANPOOLS

Average 7.8 members per vanpool, traveling an average distance of 38 miles to work.

Most likely to pool with co-workers (56%)

Meeting places:

• 54% meet at driver's home
• 36% meet at a central location
• 41% report traveling out of their way an average of ten miles to meet other members
• 10% picked up by the driver at their home

BUS TRANSIT

Mean trip distance for bus riders is 15 miles

Overall, 39% of commuters were aware of an available bus they could take to work, with 44% awareness reported for Los Angeles County.

1994

State Of The Commute Report--Continued

Commuter Transportation Services, Inc.

Men, compared to women, were more likely to report as commuting factors:

• Travel time (20% vs. 15%)
• Work hours (11% vs. 6%)
• Commuting costs (9% vs. 6%)

Women, compared to men, were more likely to report as commuting factors:

• Convenience (33% vs. 28%)
• Available travel options (11% vs. 6%)
• Vehicle availability at work for personal reasons (20% vs. 13%)

1994

Long Range Transportation Plan

Los Angeles County MTA (Metropolitan Transportation Authority)

Office of Planning and Programming

This summary is from a series of presentations planned to highlight issues and progress related to the development of the MTA Long-Range Transportation Plan. The information is based on baseline¹ transportation system information in 1990 and projected figures for 2015.

Major Conclusions:

• Current travel behavior and projected growth for Los Angeles County will only exacerbate future transportation deficiencies.
• Many areas lack the infrastructure to accommodate projected growth.
• Without improvements to bus transit for access, rail transit will not be able to perform up to its capability.

Fixing the Baseline:

The baseline (1990), results in a growing proportion of drive alone trips relative to carpool and transit trips.

Goal of the Long Range Transportation Plan:

• Create an improved baseline which responds to Los Angeles County growth so that carpool and transit trips remain near 1990 levels.

Suggestions for improving baseline:

• As rail transit lines open, modify bus service to feed rail stations and eliminate route duplication, freeing extra buses or other needed services.
• Add key HOV interchanges

¹Note: Baseline projects include both transit (rail, bus, and other transit, i.e. Union Station Gateway Transit Center) and highway projects (HOV projects, gap closures, major arterial widenings, and other projects). JULY 1994

Omnitrans Public Transportation Attitude and Awareness Study

A sample size of 813 Omnitrans riders were surveyed at bus stops or on-board Omnitrans buses, and 811 non-riders were surveyed via telephone, to determine attitude and awareness of Omnitrans buses.

A summary of key findings:

Overall:

For both riders and non-riders, proportionally the Hispanic population in the area is increasing while the White population is decreasing.

Riders:

• More than 34% have used Omnitrans to transfer to another bus system, and more than 3% have used it to transfer to Metrolink
• Major reasons for riding Omnitrans include work, shopping, and school
• One in five employed respondents stated their employers provide an incentive to ride by bus
• riders feel positive about the drivers, the buses being on time, and the heating/air condition on the buses

Non-riders:

• Main reasons non-riders do not use the bus:
• the bus takes too long/car is quicker
• convenience of a car
• bus stop is too far

JANUARY 1994

Work End Phase of Urban Rail Market Research

Orange County Transportation Authority Worksite Study

The purpose of the study was to gain additional information to assist in making a decision on a priority urban rail corridor for Orange County. The study targeted the commuter at both the home end and work end, and included 19,659 returned employee questionnaires.

Summary of key findings:

Mode of travel to work:

• 79% drive alone
• 13% carpool
• 2% walk
• 2% use bus transit
• 1% bicycle
• 1% vanpool
• 1% motorcycle
• 0.1% train

Commute characteristics:

• 59% of commuters indicated their job did not require them to have access to their car during the day
• 39% reported they have a job where a car is necessary to get around during the day
• Non-work discretionary trips are made during the time of the evening commute rather than the morning commute, producing more competition for road space.

JULY 1993

Metrolink Non-Rider Survey

Topline Data

The study was designed to survey commuters who have access to Metrolink but elect to use other modes for their home-to-work trip, in order to provide new information to SCRRA for marketing and advertising programs that will broaden the ridership base. The survey was conducted by telephone with 1,203 commuters who live and work within a seven mile radius of a Metrolink line. The survey was targeted to residents within San Bernardino, Ventura County, and Santa Clarita rail corridors.

Summary of key findings:

Survey respondents reported using the following modes for their regular commute to work:

• 84% Drive alone
• 10% Carpool
• 4% Local/Express Bus
• 1% Vanpool
• 1% Motorcycle

Awareness & Rider Perception

95% of those surveyed were aware of the system through:

• television news
• newspaper articles
• seeing the trains and stations
• through their employers

Most frequent reasons for not commuting via Metrolink:

• driving is more convenient
• station is not close to their work site
• schedule of the train is not compatible with the commuters' schedule
• they need a car during business hours

System changes that would make non-riders much more likely to ride Metrolink:

• 48% : free van/shuttle/taxi service to and from the Metrolink station
• 40%: availability of Employer subsidies/guaranteed ride home programs

May 1993

San Fernando Valley Market Management Demonstration Project

Los Angeles County MTA (Metropolitan Transportation Authority)

The purpose of this study was to determine strategies where transportation agencies are able to improve mobility and meet transportation needs through service marketing/positioning, changes in existing service characteristics, and development of new transportation services. The survey focused on trip characteristics, commuter mode choices, commuter market segments, transit/ridesharing target markets, and commuter services/trade-offs. A summary of key findings (756 in-person interviews):

Commute Time:

• Trips with a duration of an hour or more are almost exclusively work related
• Work trips increase with income, and are prevalent among 30-50 year olds
• Compared to solo-drivers and ridesharers, transit riders do not believe keeping travel time to a minimum is of primary importance
• Transit riders are slightly less likely to consider their travel time wasted time.

Parking

• Both solo-drivers and ridesharers agree that an important motivating factor for car use is the availability of free parking at their destination.
• Survey responses indicate that car use would be significantly less attractive, particularly for ridesharers, if parking was expensive

Flexibility

• The ability to reach a destination at a designated time as well as the flexibility to come and go as desired is important to all modes of transportation.
• Most commuters, regardless of mode, express a need for available transportation in case of emergencies.

Safety

• Compared to other modes, commuters are not generally confident about the level of personal safety that transit provides; however, most transit users feel safe using their chosen modes.
• Commuters generally rate solo driving and ride sharing as safer than transit.

JULY 1992

Transportation Demand Management at Small Employer Sites

Commuter Transportation Services, Inc.

This study focused on employer worksites with 25-99 employees, to aid in designing TDM programs which will be most appropriate for this employer market. Personnel managers working at 1,145 sites in General Southern California (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties) with 25 to 99 employees were surveyed by phone. A summary of key findings:

Travel behavior

• Compared to other employees at larger sites, employees working at smaller sites with less than 100 employees are slightly less likely to rideshare (70% drive alone every day compared to 67% at larger sites)
• Employees at smaller sites are less likely to carpool and more likely to use public transit than employees at larger sites
• Employees at smaller sites are more likely to need their car for business or personal reasons during their work day.
• 42% of employees report they might or would definitely consider carpooling compared to 34% at larger sites.
• 37% of employees report they might or would definitely consider vanpooling compared to 25% at larger sites.
• 17% of employees report they might or would definitely consider taking the bus compared to 9% at larger sites.
• 63% of the employers offered no ridesharing services or incentives

Incentives

• Employers with 75-99 employees are somewhat more likely to offer ridesharing incentives.

For those who do offer incentives:

• 17% assist employees in forming car/vanpools
• 17% provide rideshare information
• 12% provide preferred parking spaces to ridesharers
• 11% provide bus route and schedule information
• 11% offer use of company car during the day to ridesharers
• 8% provide free/low cost parking

Language Consideration

• 55% of the respondents said they would need materials in Spanish as well as English

1991

Southern California Origin/Destination Survey

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)

This survey focused on origins and destinations in Southern California. Some key findings include:

• The percentage of vehicle driver home-work (H-W) and other-work (O-W) trip purposes increased in the study area between 1976 and 1991.

• Home-work trips had the lowest average vehicle occupancy rate (1.10) and the highest percentage of drive alone trips (93%).

• Trips start times indicated that the peak periods of home-work travel have increased, with the am peak extending from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m., and the p.m. peak starting at 3 p.m. and continuing after 6 p.m. (SCAG, 1993).

1991

The National Bicycling and Walking Study

Final Report

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

This report focused on all work completed through 1990 outlining a plan of action to promote bicycling and walking as viable transportation options for more Americans. The report outlines a plan of action for activities at the Federal, State and local levels to meet two goals:

• To double the current percentage (from 7.9% to 15.8%) of total trips made by bicycling and walking
• To reduce by ten percent the number of bicyclists and pedestrians killed or injured in traffic crashes

Results from a 1991 Harris Poll survey indicated:

• 46% of adults aged 18 and older had ridden a bicycle in the previous year; of these:
  • 46% stated they would sometimes commute to work by bicycle if safe bicycle lanes were available.
  • 53% would commute to work by bicycle if they had safe, separate, designated paths on which to ride.
  • 45% would commute to work by bicycle if their workplace has showers, lockers, and secure bicycle storage.
  • 47% would bicycle to work if their employer offered financial or other incentives.

July 1991

Hispanic Market Research Study

Commuter Transportation Services, Inc.

Final Report

Information for this report was drawn from 1990 census data, 1991 Commuter Survey results, focus groups, and three major areas of interest: language/culture, marketing/advertising strategies, and media usage. A summary of key findings:

	Spanish Speaking Hispanics	English Speaking Hispanics	Non-Hispanics
Most important mode choice factor
No other option available	39.1%	22.3%	19.4%

Travel Time

30.1%

25.8%

29.3%

Convenience/Flexibility	14.9%	34.6%	39.1%
Commute distance and travel time
Mean Distance	13.7 miles	16.0 miles	17.4 miles

Mean trip time to work	26 min.	31 min.	35 min.
Mean trip time to home	35 min.	39 min.	39 min.

Hispanics are positively oriented to the ridesharing concept for several reasons:

• Economic survival issues (needing to share to make ends meet).
• Cultural qualities (preferring to do things in groups, especially family and community).

Barriers to carpooling:

• Fear of unknown persons and their habits
• Insurance issues
• Having to pick up children after work
• Going out of one's way

Best motivators:

• Help in sharing the cost of gas
• Avoiding wear and tear on vehicle
• Employers' incentives such as raffles, parking, money for gas, etc.

Suggestions for future marketing efforts:

• Sending colorful, bilingual brochures (with accurate translations) with pictures/graphics and strong visual appeal to homes.
• Distributing brochures at grocery stores, DMV offices, and utility payment locations
• Using TV and Radio to repeat the rideshare message.

Hispanics suggested a mature "ordinary" spokesperson who can speak from their experience (celebrity mothers have been effective in previous campaigns).Regional Profile Analysis

Products, Capacity, Placement and Pricing

Throughout much of Southern California, commuters travel on congested freeways and arterials. The worst levels of congestion are typically experienced in Los Angeles and Orange Counties, where many freeways and major arterials now operate at a Level of Service F (LOS) (speeds of less than 20 miles per hour). Even in the less densely populated counties of Ventura, San Bernardino, and Riverside, portions of the freeway network (e.g. I-10, SR 91 and US 101) operate at LOS F during peak hour commute periods (Caltrans, 1993).

Despite a decline in Los Angeles County congestion, Southern California remains the most congested region in the state (Caltrans, 1993) (see maps next two pages). In Los Angeles County, Route 10 and 60 were the most congested routes, experiencing over three hours of delay in the morning peak and almost five hours of delay in the afternoon. Both Routes 10 (San Bernardino Freeway) and 60 (Pomona Freeway) connect major activity centers with affordable housing in Eastern Los Angeles County, Riverside County, and San Bernardino County. On the Westside, Routes 10 (Santa Monica Freeway) and 405 (San Diego Freeway) also experience heavy congestion, with congestion occurring in both directions (Caltrans, 1993).

Orange County is the second most congested County. Most of the vehicle delays occur on Routes 91 and 405 (53%). Route 5 (Northbound in the morning and Southbound in the evening) and Route 57 (Southbound in the morning and Northbound in the evening) also are heavily congested (Caltrans, 1993).

Riverside and San Bernardino Counties experience congestion due to residents commuting to work sites in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Route 91 (between Riverside and Orange Counties) is the most congested corridor in these two Counties. Other major congestion is located on Routes 10 and 60 (Caltrans, 1993).

To increase road capacity, there are four toll road projects under development (one in Riverside County and three in Orange County; the Foothill Corridor toll road has already opened). These are the only major mixed-flow highway projects under development in the region (SCAG, 1993).

In a further attempt to alleviate congestion, transportation planning agencies have begun to emphasize the importance of projects that increase the person carrying capacity of the existing freeway system, rather than merely the vehicular capacity. For a region that is dominated by the freeway and the drive alone commuter, this represents a major policy shift. The following sections discuss existing and proposed facilities that fit this new approach, including HOV lanes, rail systems, bus systems and supporting multi-modal transfer facilities.

Available alternative transportation products for the region include:

1. Carpools and vanpools
2. Bus
3. Rail
4. Telecommuting
5. Bicycling and Walking

Also included in this discussion are miscellaneous product or service enhancements.

1. CARPOOLS AND VANPOOLS

Carpools

Carpools are the second most popular form of commuting (13.8%) after solo driving (71%). U.S. Census figures (1990) show that 15.2% of workers commute by this mode. According to Southern California Rideshare (formerly CTS), approximately 14.5% of the commuters in this region carpool to work. Although the highest percentage of these carpools are comprised exclusively of household members commuting together (42%), employee carpools among co-workers (42%), with friends and neighbors (16%), and with other non-household members (3%) are also popular.

As shown in the following table, 80.5% of the carpoolers, representing 11.1% of all workers, participate in a two person carpool.

Source: U.S. Census, 1990

Vanpools

U.S. Census figures (1990) indicate that 0.3% of workers used vanpools in the Southern California region. Vanpooling is typically considered as seven to 15 persons commuting together on a regular basis and sharing expenses. Traditionally, vanpoolers tend to have longer commutes, often living 20 or more miles from work with limited access to other options such as bus or rail. However, CTS estimates that the average one-way commute distance in vanpools in this region is 40 miles. On the average one-way travel time for vanpooling is this region is about one (1) hour (CTS, 1993).

A total of 2,233 vanpools (excluding Orange County) are in operation in this region (CTS Vans Report, 1993). This is almost twice as many as in 1992, when 1,027 vanpools existed. There are 356 vans operating in Orange County (OCTA, 1993). In 1992, 309 vans operated in Orange County.

The estimated cost of a two person carpool is $160.00 per month and for a vanpool, $90.00-$110.00, based on 20 miles (one way), 20 work days per month, and $0.40 mile cost to drive (with no parking costs). The carpool cost also represents the commuter's capital and operating costs.

Buspools

Buspools (privately operated buses) are not common but do have a presence in Southern California. There were approximately 47 buspools in the Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Ventura areas, and one buspool in Orange County in Orange County. In 1992, there were 35 buspools in Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Ventura areas, and 45 in Orange County.

High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes

In Southern California, there are more than 230 HOV lane miles, representing more than 56% of the total HOV lanes in California. Sixty-eight of these miles are on Los Angeles freeways, carrying an average volume of 1,250 vehicle per hour, per lane, during peak commuter hours (MTA, 1995). Unlike the Bay Area and San Diego areas where HOV facilities are only used during peak hours, Southern California HOV lanes operate 24 hours per day. A total of 390 additional HOV lane miles are planned for this region. The following table briefly summarizes existing and proposed HOV facilities.

Source: Caltrans, 1993; Kosmont & Assoc. 1995

Park and Ride Lots

There are over 200 park and ride lots throughout the Southern California region. Caltrans administers park and ride lots as a convenient, low-cost incentive to assist commuters connecting with alternative forms of transportation including transit and rail. Additionally, bike lockers are available at some park and ride lots throughout the region. While many park and ride lots are located on state right of ways adjacent to freeways, some lots operate on private land (e.g.; churches, schools, shopping centers/malls). In addition, there are many unofficial ridesharing lots operating in commercial and government parking lots. For the most part, there are only a few lots which require a fee, although some require the use of a permit. Some lots also have restrictions on overnight and/or weekend parking.

The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) uses an innovative approach for making Pool and Ride available to ridesharers. They lease unused parking areas from private property owners as needed. This allows for locations that are tailored to ridesharers needs.

Orange County (44)
Anaheim	La Palma	San Clemente
Brea	Laguna Hills	San Juan Capistrano
Costa Mesa	Lake Forest	Santa Ana
Fountain Valley	Los Alamitos	Westminister
Fullerton	Mission Viejo	Yorba Linda
Garden Grove	Newport Beach
Huntington Beach	Orange
Irvine	Rancho Santa Margarita
Ventura County (17)		Riverside County (19)
Camarillo	Santa Paula	Corona	Pedley
Moorpark	Simi Valley	Lake Elsinore	Riverside
Oakview	Thousand Oaks	Mira Loma	Temecula
Ojai	Ventura	Moreno Valley
Oxnard		Norco

San Bernardino County (18)
Barstow	Fontana	Rancho Cucamonga	Upland
Bloomington	Lake Arrowhead	Rialto	Victor Valley
Colton	Montclair	Running Springs	Victorville
Crestline	Ontario	San Bernardino	Yucaipa

Source: Park and Ride Lots Map, Southern California Rideshare and Caltrans, 1995.

Multi-Modal Stations

More expensive than Park and Ride lots, Multi-Modal Transit Stations are the crucial transfer points in the developing regional transit system. Caltrans and local transportation agencies are building new stations and rehabilitating old stations throughout the region (Caltrans, 1993). These facilities are usually constructed in denser, urban areas and are designed to facilitate transfers between as many different modes of travel (commuter rail, subway, light rail, HOV facilities, buses) as possible.

One of the best examples will occur around Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles, the Gateway Intermodal Transit Center. The Center will provide easy connections for Southern California region commuters region using Metro Rail (including the planned Pasadena Blue Line), Amtrak, Metrolink, the El Monte Busway, regional and local bus service, vanpool, carpool, and taxi services. In addition to providing an efficient transfer point into the adjacent Downtown core, several million square feet of new office and retail development are planned for the site, creating new employment opportunities with excellent access to regional transportation systems.

2. BUS OPERATIONS

The two largest bus operators in the region are the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Together, they operate over 3,000 buses during peak commute hours.

In Southern California, most of the buses operate in a grid pattern. While this allows the transit agencies to provide bus service to a greater number of people, it does not provide enough service for most suburban activity centers. Bus rerouting is being considered by most operators to match existing and potential trip patterns and provide more direct and faster service to major employment centers.

Los Angeles County

The fixed route system is composed of over 650 different routes and over 3,250 buses organized as a mixture of grid, radial and shuttle service. There are four additional fixed route operators from outlying counties which operate local and commuter service into Los Angeles County. Approximately 55 express routes operate on portions of the freeway system (LACTC, 1992).

The LACMTA is the largest transit agency, operating 2,363 buses with an average daily ridership of 1,232,119 (LACMTA, 1995). The Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT), Foothill Transit, Santa Monica Municipal Bus Lines, Long Beach Transit, and a number of other operators provide both express and local service.

Most of the local and express bus service focuses on Downtown Los Angeles. For example, express bus service provides access to the Los Angeles Central Business District, utilizing about 500 buses and carrying more than 100,000 passengers per average weekday (SCAG, 1990). A Transit Check program is under development in order to facilitate inter-operator and multi-modal transfers.

LADOT

To supplement MTA routes and improve circulation within downtown, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) operates shuttle routes. The SMART SHUTTLE demonstration program is planned for 1996. The program will examine the cost effectiveness of a community-based demand responsive transportation system. By utilizing advanced technologies like Automated Vehicle Locators and computer aided dispatching and scheduling, the Smart Shuttle program will improve transportation services in a cost efficient manner, focusing on transportation services which better serve the needs of the community.

Additional LADOT services include Commuter Express, DASH, CityRide, and paratransit programs. LADOT operates an active fleet of 47 Commuter Express Routes to downtown Los Angeles, and an active fleet of 25 Transit Service Expansion programs to other areas (e.g; Tri-Cities, Century City), Monday through Friday during peak commuter hours. Headways average 15-30 minutes on routes with high ridership. LADOT also operates a fleet of 109 DASH buses which provide service Monday through Saturday, with operating hours between 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. (with exceptions; days and times dependent on specific routes). Headways average five to 30 minutes (LADOT, 1995).

LADOT one-way fares range from $0.25 (DASH) to $1.75. Monthly costs for a LADOT bus pass range from $42.00-$66.00, for an MTA bus pass $49.00-$79.00. Lower fares are available for students, seniors, persons with disabilities, and children ages four years or younger.

RUSH

RUSH is a new, upscale service which began in October 1995. RUSH runs between peak commuter morning and evening hours (6:30 a.m.-9:30 a.m.; 4:30 p.m.-7:30 p.m.), and provides mid-day service in Beverly Hills and Westwood. The service has three routes (with eight buses): West Hollywood/Century City; Palms/Century City; and Brentwood/ Century City. A monthly pass is available for $60.00; a monthly pass for off-peak hours is $20. Single rides are $1.50 during peak hours and $0.50 for off-peak hours. Seating capacity on each propane-fueled shuttle is approximately sixteen people.

Orange County

The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) operates 508 buses and provides service throughout Orange County. In addition to its local service, OCTA operates express bus routes to Downtown Los Angeles and Riverside County, and commuter rail to Downtown Los Angeles. OCTA is responsible for County-wide transportation planning, and the operation of both transit and rideshare service (OCTA, 1991). OCTA's average daily ridership is approximately 139,000. According to an OCTA On-Board Bus Study (1990), the typical local service customer is Hispanic, transit dependent, age 22-34 with a household income of less than $30,000. In contrast, the typical 1990 OCTA Express Bus Service customer was white, had access to a car, age 35-54 with a household income of over $50,000.

Recent changes to OCTA include the introduction of eight new Runabouts, a smaller version of the commuter bus, which was added to community routes. Additionally, buses now operate at 10, 30, or 60 minute intervals, with more buses added to routes with high ridership (OCTA, 1995).

Ventura County

In Ventura County, cities provide transit service to meet local travel needs. Ventura, Oxnard, Ojai, Santa Paula and Port Hueneme formed the South Coast Area Transit (SCAT) to provide bus service in their communities. In addition to SCAT, Simi Valley, Fillmore, Moorpark, Camarillo and Thousand Oaks have fixed route transit service (JHK & Associates, 1991; Ventura County, 1993). In Ventura County, the average daily transit ridership is approximately 9,000. Express bus service is available along the Port Hueneme-Oxnard-Ventura corridor, Thousand Oaks-San Fernando Valley corridor and the Simi Valley-Chatsworth corridor. Ventura County operators utilize 55 buses on a variety of fixed routes (VCTC, 1991; VCTC, 1993; Ventura County, 1993). The Ventura County Transportation Commission, transit providers and local jurisdictions are examining the feasibility of enhancing bus and rail service, including new express service on Routes 101 and 126, the Eastern and Central areas of the County (SCAG, 1993).

Riverside County

The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) provides most of the transit service in Riverside County. Five other agencies offer fixed route service. While RTA provides service throughout the western portion of Riverside County, the City of Riverside is the system's focal point. Within the City of Riverside, major attractors/generators include the downtown business district, Riverside Plaza, Galleria at Tyler, University of California, Riverside, and Riverside Community College. Approximately 42% of all transit trips involve City of Riverside trip attractors/generators. Recognizing the need for express bus service along the Riverside (Route 91) Freeway, Riverside Transit Agency and OCTA operate the Inland Empire Connection, an express bus between Riverside and Orange Counties. RTA and Omnitrans jointly operate two routes from Riverside/San Bernardino also called the Inland Empire Connection. The RTA operates approximately 75 full size buses on 29 fixed routes (RTA, 1995).

San Bernardino County

Communities in San Bernardino County with smaller populations are served by Dial-A-Ride service and limited fixed route bus services. In the most urbanized southwestern region of San Bernardino County, Omnitrans is the largest transit provider. Omnitrans operates 147 buses with an average daily ridership of 22,500 (Omnitrans, 1995). Barstow, Victorville and the mountain communities (between Crestline and Lake Arrowhead) also operate fixed route bus service (Caltrans, 1991). In this part of the county, Omnitrans provides service to approximately 70 percent of the major employers (100 or more employees).

Source: Foothill Transit, 1995; LACMTA, 1994, 1995; LADOT, 1995; OCTA, 1995; Omnitrans, 1995; RUSH, 1995; RTA, 1995; Santa Monica Bus Lines, 1995; SCAT, 1995;

* Includes buses, Red Line and Blue Line.

3. RAIL OPERATIONS

In Southern California, there are four rail transit operators: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA), Amtrak, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), or Metrolink. During the 1980s, local transportation agencies, particularly in Los Angeles County, embarked on massive programs to reinstate a regional rail transit system composed of heavy rail (e.g. Metro Red Line), light rail (e.g. the Long Beach Blue Line), and commuter rail (e.g. Metrolink). Los Angeles County transportation officials anticipate that the rail system should serve as the backbone of the regional transit system (LACMTA, 1993).

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY (LACMTA)

LACMTA operates the 46 miles of Metro Rail including the Green Line, Blue Line, and Red Line. Each Metro Rail car has capacity for 230 passengers, with 76 seats. The Blue Line and the Red Line combined carry an average of 53,000 passengers daily (MTA Review, 1995). Fares are $1.35 one way, with monthly passes available for $49.00 ($12.00 for seniors, disabled, and sight impaired; students(K-12th grade $20.00; college or vocational student passes $30.00). The following is a brief summary of each Metro Line:

Metro Green Line

The Green Line opened for service on August 12, 1995. This line runs from Norwalk to Redondo Beach, and includes 20 miles of track and fourteen stations, with a travel time from end to end of 35 minutes. Trains operate from 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., and arrives every seven minutes at peak hours and every 12 minutes at off-peak hours (CTS, 1995). Metro passengers may transfer free to the City of Norwalk's Metrolink/Green Line shuttle for travel to the Norwalk Green Line Station (SCRRA, 1995).

Metro Blue Line

The Metro Blue Line (54 light rail vehicles) runs seven days a week, with 15 minute headway between 5 a.m. and 11 p.m. The line runs between 7th Street/Metro Center and Long Beach. The Pasadena Blue Line is in the early design and construction phases and is expected to be completed in 2002. The Pasadena Blue Line will connect with the Metro Red Line at Union Station.

Metro Red Line

The Metro Red Line encompasses several segments. Segment One runs from Westlake/MacArthur Park and Union Station, and opened in 1993. The Red Line operates every five to 15 minutes between 5:00 am and 9:00 p.m. Segment Two includes the Wilshire Section, scheduled to open in Spring of 1996, and the Vermont/Hollywood, scheduled to open in Spring of 1999. Segment Three includes a North Hollywood extension, slated to open in Spring of 2000. Both the Mid-City and Eastern extension are in the early phases of design.

AMTRAK

In the Southern California region, AMTRAK offers daily service between San Diego and Santa Barbara on three trains. Beginning in November, a fourth train will be added offering four departure and arrival times between San Diego and Santa Barbara. Between San Diego and Los Angeles, one-way fare is $24, round-trip $32 and a weekly 10-ride pass is $130. An unlimited monthly pass is available for $444.

ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (OCTA)

In Spring of 1994, the OCTA commuter rail line became part of the Metrolink Oceanside/Los Angeles line (OCTA, 1994). With connections to both Los Angeles and San Diego, Orange County residents now have rail service to both major urban areas.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (SCRRA)

SCRRA or Metrolink, a joint powers authority of Los Angeles, Ventura, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange Counties, operates five lines at 43 train stations (79 trains daily, Monday - Friday) over 345 miles. A sixth line opened in October, 1995. Metrolink operates Monday through Friday on all lines, with service available Monday through Saturday on the San Bernardino line.

On an average week day, Metrolink carries 20,000 passengers. While many passengers are destined for Union Station, there are other passengers destined for more suburban destinations such as Burbank, Glendale or El Monte (SCRRA, 1994).

Generally, the typical Metrolink rider is very different from a bus rider. Former drive alones, the average Metrolink rider lives about five miles from the station and works about three miles from a station and is most likely a white, male professional with a household income of $63,000 (Facts Consolidated, 1993).

Monthly costs for adult fare on the Metrolink average $80.00 to $272.00, depending on number of zones traveled. The following briefly summarizes Metrolink's lines:

Santa Clarita Line

This line services the areas of Lancaster, Vincent Grade/Acton, Via Princessa, Santa Clarita, and Sylmar/San Fernando to Union Station, with stops at Burbank and Glendale.

Ventura County Line

This line services the areas of Oxnard, Camarillo, Moorpark, Simi Valley, Chatsworth, Northridge, Van Nuys, the Burbank Airport, Burbank and Glendale, to Union Station.

San Bernardino Line

This line services the areas of San Bernardino, Rialto, Fontana, Rancho Cucamonga, Upland, Montclair, Claremont, Pomona, Covina, Baldwin Park, El Monte, and Cal State L.A. to Union Station. Eighty-eight percent of the San Bernardino line passengers are destined for Downtown Los Angeles.

Riverside Line

This line services the areas of downtown Riverside, with stops at Pedley Station, East Ontario, and Industry to Union Station.

Orange County Line

This line has ten stops, servicing the areas of Oceanside, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Irvine, Santa Ana, Orange, Anaheim, Fullerton, and Commerce. The Norwalk/Santa Fe Springs station opened in July of 1995.

Inland Empire Line

The Inland Empire line opened in October 1995, and provides service between existing stations in downtown Riverside and Irvine with stops in Riverside, La Sierra, West Corona, Orange, Santa Ana, and Irvine.

4. TELECOMMUTING

Twelve and one half percent of employees in this region claim that they have the opportunity to work at an alternative work site. The vast majority (86%) of those offered the opportunity to utilize alternative work sites do so an average of four times a month (CTS, 1994).

The following chart summarizes information on telecenters in the Southern California region.

Telecenter	Work Stations	Private Offices	Video Conf.	Office Space	Opened	Rates
Antelope Valley	55	5	yes	n/a	Jan 1993	Station: $380 Office $440
Anaheim	15	16	yes	10,000 sq ft	June 1994	Office $295-1195 Station $195
Apple Valley/High Desert	12	0	no		Oct 1991	$204/month
Highland	7	1	yes	1200 sq ft	Dec 1992	$100/work station
Lancaster	50	n/a	n/a	n/a	Feb 1994	n/a
Long Beach (Alliance Business Center and World Trade)	varies	varies	yes	varies	various centers since 1989	rates vary
Long Beach (Office Technology Group)	27	10	yes	5500 sq ft	March 1995	station $400 office $500
Moorpark College	5	0	future	900 sq ft	March 1995	$100-$200/mo.
Ontario	15	2	yes	4300 sq ft	Oct 1991	$100-$300/mo.
Pomona	3	7	yes	3200 sq ft	March 1994	station $125 office $150
San Juan Capistrano	7	7	n/a	n/a	March 1995	n/a
Santa Clarita Telebusiness Ctr	15	5	yes	3500 sq ft	March 1994	station $175 office $400 deluxe office $500
Santa Clarita	12	5	yes	n/a	n/a	n/a
Simi Valley	4	0	no	n/a	June 1991	$200/mo.
Valencia (Santa Clarita)	38	0	n/a	n/a	Feb 1994	station $150
Van Nuys	30	0	n/a	n/a	Feb 1994	station $150
Ventura Community College	5	0	future	leased trailer	March 1995	$100-$200/mo
Westlake	30	0	n/a	n/a	Feb 1994	station $150
Note: The above chart reflects data from 1994. Some telecenters are "government only" and not available for public use. N/A: not available.
Sources: Kosmont Associate, Inc. Survey, 1995; User/Provider Group Survey, 1995; UC Davis RABO Project 1994.

A variety of private and public sector employers share these facilities and allow their employees who live near these centers to work at the telecenters 1-2 days per week on average. There is a positive correlation between one's annual income and the opportunity to telecommute (CTS, 1993). Some of the largest and oldest telecommuting programs in the nation were started in Southern California. Pacific Bell and the County of Los Angeles are examples of private and public sector agencies involved in telecommuting in this region.

This product includes home based telecommuting and telecommuting from telecenters. As suggested by its name, home based telecommuting involves an employee working out of his or her home, thereby eliminating their commute trip(s). This "commute" option generally requires not only the choice of the commuter, but the consent of the employer to the mode choice.

5. BICYCLING/WALKING

Despite the moderate weather, very few commuters in this region walk or bicycle to work. U.S. Census figures (1990) indicate that 2.9% of workers walk, and 0.7% bicycle in Southern California. CTS surveys show that 1.3% of commuters walk to work, and .6% bicycle (CTS, 1994). By comparison, ample facilities exist to assist bicycle commuters; approximately 44% of employers, with 100 or more employees in this region have bike racks, and approximately 25% have showers and lockers (Giuliano et al., 1992). There are currently 6, 000 bicycle spaces in Los Angeles county (LADOT, 1995).

In Riverside County, through the partnership between Riverside Bicycle Commuter Coalition (RBCC) and Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), "Wheels to Work" provides bicycles, enclosed bicycle lockers, and other bicycling safety equipment for selectively targeted employers. Participating employers will each receive over $15,000 in bicycle incentives and resources.

Bicycle master plans that will add a total of 914 miles of new bicycle facilities over the next twenty years in the San Fernando Valley/North County, San Gabriel Valley, and South Bay areas were recently approved by the LACMTA board (MTA Review, 1995).

MISCELLANEOUS PRODUCT OR SERVICE ENHANCEMENTS

Alternative Work Schedules

Alternative Work Schedules (AWS) are becoming increasingly popular among Southern California employers. Flex-time is the most widely adopted program. Forty-two percent of employees in this region are offered the opportunity to participate in a flex-time program, followed by 20% in a 4/40 schedule, 11% in a 9/80 program, and 6% in a 3/36 program (CTS, 1994). Participation in alternative work schedules has decreased significantly since last year (CTS, 1994).

Parking Management

Although charging for parking is one of the most powerful tools for reducing the number of solo drivers, 92% of commuters in this region receive free parking. The average (mean) parking amount paid per month per employee is $69.75 a month, representing a significant increase since over the $65.91 reported in 1993 (CTS, 1994). The average parking paid per month per employee in 1992 was $45.54. There was also a significant increase in the percent of commuters paying more than $100.00 per month; in 1994 51% of commuters, compared to 32% of commuters in 1994, paid more than $100.00 monthly. In most CBDs, monthly parking is available at rates ranging from $40.00 to $75.00 per month.

Those parking management programs that do exist are typically implemented in core areas where the parking supply is more limited and access to it more controllable. About half of the employees working in Downtown Los Angeles pay full price for their parking, the rest either pay nothing or receive a subsidy.

Guaranteed Ride Home

Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) programs have dramatically increased in this region. Research on companies complying with Rule 1501 (formally Regulation XV) shows that within the first year of submitting plans, 47.3% of the companies had GRH programs; in the second year that number had increased to 74.5%. The average increase in carpooling at sites providing GRH (and monetary incentives) was higher than at sites without such incentives. According to CTS, 40% of the employees in this region are aware of GRH programs at their worksite (CTS, 1994).

Caltrans' 10 GRH grantees in Southern California include three TMAs (Gateway Corporate Center, Irvine Spectrum and LA 12th Council District), several governmental units (Orange County, Moreno Valley school district, Los Angeles County Office of Education), three private entities (Northrop Corp., Provident Savings Bank, and Director's Mortgage Loan Corp.) and a non-profit (Inland Empire Economic Council).

Commuter Stores

The Riverside County Commuter Exchange is a 40-foot custom built vehicle that is used at events for large companies, transportation fairs, trade shows, business parks and malls to promote carpooling, commuting by bus, mass transit, bicycling and walking. This unit cost $100,000; has an onboard computer and printer to help match carpoolers, a VCR that plays educational tapes, a small kitchenette, and pamphlets and materials on transportation services. The Mobile Commuter Exchange was funded and developed by the Riverside County Transportation Commission.

This fall, LADOT will also be opening its first Transit Store in Lincoln Heights to serve as a multi-media transit information center for residents living in the northeast region of the city. LADOT's trained staff will provide telephone information service, sell LADOT monthly passes, ticket, and token sales and assist walk-ins with information about transfers from LADOT Commuter Express and DASH services on to other transit services. A wide range of information on public transit such as local bus lines, express bus lines, local circulators (such as DASH), Metrolink, bicycle maps, Park and Ride lots and carpool/vanpool information will also be made available to commuters. In addition, the Transit Store will serve as a CITYRIDE information center where eligible customers may register for services and purchase scrip.

Products and Pricing

PRODUCT	PRICING
Carpool	$160/month*
Vanpool	$90-$110/month*1
HOV Lanes	Typically no toll
Toll Roads	$0.25 to $2.75 No charge on 91 Express lane for three or more people per car
Park and Ride Lots	Typically no fee; some require the purchase of a permit. Fee required at certain lots (e.g.: $1/day or $40/annually for San Clemente Residents at San Clemente Metrolink Station).
Bus Operations (All Providers)	Regular Adult Fare .50-$1.75 LADOT DASH $0.25 Monthly Passes range from $42-$90
Rail Operations
LACMTA Metro	$49-$79 monthly costs
SCRRA Metrolink	$80-$272 monthly costs depending on number of zones traveled
AMTRAK	$444 monthly pass between Los Angeles and San Diego $130 10-ride pass between Los Angeles and San Diego
Telecommuting	Stations: $100-$400/monthly Offices: $100-$1195/monthly
* Based on 20 miles one-way, 20 work days per month and $0.40 mile cost to drive (with no parking costs, which typically range from $40-$100 monthly). Also represents the commuters capital and operating costs. 1 Cost dependent on number of people in vanpool.

Product Viability

The consumer research indicates that a significant segment of the population would consider using alternative modes of transportation. Reasons commuters identified for not using alternative modes include:

• It is not convenient or not available for their specific trip
• It takes too long
• It doesn't accommodate work hours or commute schedules
• Need their car during the day
• Reliability concerns

Conversely, to be a viable product, alternative transportation must be comparably fast with direct routing, have frequent enough service to accommodate riders schedules, and reliable. In some cases, consumers' desire for alternatives exceeds their expectations of the existing product lines. Other alternative transportation products, however, present a competitive option for commuters driving alone.

Strengths

The availability, capacity, and affordability of alternative transportation products are strengths of this region. This, coupled with significant congestion on segments of all freeways and many arterials, makes the marketing of transportation alternatives a more feasible task than in other regions of the state.

There are significant HOV lanes constructed and more are planned to complete an extensive HOV network connecting several of the counties in Southern California (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside). This system offers a valuable incentive of time savings.

Metrolink service is expanding and ridership is growing. In many communities, this service is perceived as an excellent value, with ideal operating hours, and reliable and upscale service. In addition, connecting shuttles, rail and bus systems are being expanded on the home and work ends of Metrolink lines.

There are also several express bus services (LADOT Express buses; DASH, SMART, RUSH), and vanpools (many employer sponsored) are increasing, providing faster service and more direct routing. In some areas, excellent bikeways also exist for bicycle commuters.

Supporting the marketing effort of these products are many existing marketing agencies including transportation agencies, TMAs and ETCs. There is a large existing database of employers, potential carpoolers and vanpoolers, and presently, there are regulations in place supporting alternative transportation (including such things as employer subsidies of public transit).

Other strengths include a positive local media and the potential for elected officials/spokespersons to champion a cause.

Weaknesses

While available alternative transportation products are a strength, the lack of competitive products in many areas of the Southern California region is also a weakness. Even the planned and funded new products and infrastructure improvements will not be adequate to accommodate the projected growth in the region.

Because the Southern California region is a large geographic area with multiple systems and multiple commuting modes, there is often a lack of consistent information and programs available to commuters throughout the region (varying guaranteed ride home programs, lack of a unified pass/debit card for all modes). A weakness of one product (for example the cleanliness/ image of MTA buses) can be unfairly carried over by potential riders to other similar type products, and make marketing of targeted products difficult.

Additionally, there is a perception that some alternative modes are more costly and/or inconvenient than driving alone, and that alternative modes are "not for me." In some areas of the region, alternative modes may not result in time savings, and may potentially take the commuter longer to arrive at a destination.

Although parking in some areas is extremely costly, in many areas it is inexpensive and therefore a disincentive for trying alternative modes of transportation.

Opportunities

Opportunities for marketing alternative transportation modes derive from the existing direct route services, new products recently introduced or coming on line (additional HOV lanes, Metrolink Inland Empire line) and enhanced products (shuttle service, regional guaranteed ride home programs). Multi-modal hubs being built to connect regional transportation to employment (most notably at Union station in Downtown LA) present a new marketing opportunity.

The increasing number of ethnic minority populations presents an opportunity to reach markets that have not been fully tapped to date. Additionally, more employees at small employer sites indicated a willingness to consider carpools, vanpools and bus.

Other opportunities include educating the consumer about alternate modes of commuting, highlighting personal benefits (e.g. more productive commute time), and implementing school education programs. Educational programs may also include promoting safety for bicyclists, pedestrians, and railroad safety.

Regional opportunities include marketing of 1-800-COMMUTE, a regional debit card, training for drivers or a reward system, and an ambassador system with feedback.

Threats

Threats to marketing alternative transportation include consumers' fear of the "unknown" and perceived problems of safety. Commuters have perceptions about the general level of service across providers and lack of flexibility after regular work hours.

From a funding perspective, transportation in Southern California is taking a beating. In the Counties of Orange and Los Angeles in particular, transportation dollars are being funneled to other public services as a result of the Orange County bankruptcy and the Los Angeles County budget crisis. This limits the ability of transportation providers to provide competitive alternatives to driving alone.

There is a prevailing belief among the business community and many legislative representatives that efforts to encourage or require ridesharing of employees have been ineffective and an unreasonable burden to the southland economy. This dissatisfaction has impacted business and public attitudes towards ridesharing, and resulted in changing legislation and regulation enforcement.

Additionally, the positive image of transportation (and government) is being questioned, as is evident from recent negative press coverage about the future of Transportation Demand Management programs and the use of new transportation and administration facilities at Union Station. Unfortunately, these negative stories can affect all transportation providers in Southern California, whether the reaction is justified or not.

An additional threat is the uncertainty of whether AQMD Rule 1501 will continue to be implemented, modified, or eliminated.Statistical/Demographic

The Southern California region, including the counties of Los Angeles, Ventura, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange, contains 49% of the California population with approximately 15.1 million inhabitants, of which approximately 6.3 million of these are commuters.

Source: U.S. Census 1980 and 1990; California Department of Finance, 1992

About 50% of the Southern California population is comprised of ethnic minorities. The Hispanic population is the largest ethnic minority in the State. Approximately 32.9% of Southern California residents are Hispanic. Asian-Americans present 8.9%, and African-Americans are 8.5%. The non-Hispanic whites are 49.9% of the population (U.S. Census, 1990).

Mode Split

A review of the mode split in the region from 1990 - 1994 is as follows:

Note: (1) Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding.
(2) SCAQMD database includes employers with more than 100 employees.

As data from the State of the Commute seems to indicate, the drive alone percentage has increased, and the percentage of transit riders, bicycle commuters and those who walk to work has decreased from 1993 to 1994. However, with the initiation of Metrolink, rail usage in the region is expected to increase. As expected, levels of carpools and vanpools are higher for the regulated companies (those with 100 or more employees), than for the general regulation.

Commute Time and Distance

For commuters throughout this region, the average one-way commuting distance in 1994 was 18.1 miles.

Source: CTS, 1992, 1993, 1994

Commuters in 1994 spent an average of 32 minutes commuting to work and 38 minutes returning to home.

Source: State of the Commute, 1994

Commute Origin and Destination

Although an estimated 40% to 50% percent of all commutes in the region are suburb to suburb within a county, some travel occurs between counties. Thirty percent of residents in both San Bernardino and Riverside Counties work outside their county (CTS, 1994).

Source: CTS, 1994

In addition to commutes between counties, commuters are also commuting to the Southern California region from counties outside the region. The most frequent interregional trips from outside the region occur between the following counties:

• Imperial and Riverside County
• Santa Barbara and Ventura/Los Angeles Counties
• San Diego and Orange County
• Kern and Los Angeles County

Organizational Structure and Responsibility for Alternative Transportation

There are several distinct regional agencies involved in the development and operation of transportation products and services, and in providing information about and marketing of these services. Some of the larger service providers include the following:

Caltrans District 7, 8, 12

Foothill Transit Authority

Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT)

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)

Omnitrans

Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA)

Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC)

Riverside Transit Agency (RTA)

San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG)

Southern California Associated Governments (SCAG)

Southern California Rideshare (formerly CTS)

Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink)

Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC)

Transportation Management Associations

Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) represent public/private partnership between developers, building owners/managers, employers, governmental organization and others working together to solve transportation related problems affecting a specific area or region through TDM and TSM measures.

There are approximately 90 TMAs in the state of California. Approximately 26 TMAs are located in the Southern California region. Most of these TMAs are in urban cores.

The types of services most often provided by TMAs include carpool matchlist, GRH programs, regulatory compliance assistance, and other rideshare coordination and marketing programs.

Los Angeles County Burbank City Centre TMA, Burbank Media District TMO, Century City TMO, El Segundo Employer Association, Encino TMA, Gateway Corporate Center TMA, Glendale TMA, Long Beach Airport Area Traffic Reduction, Mid-Valley TMA, Pasadena Civic Center TMA, Santa Clarita Vally/Valencia TMA, Santa Monica TMA, 12th Council District TMA, Warner Center TMO, Westchester/LAX TMA, West Hollywood TMO, Westside TMA, Westwood Trans-Network

Orange County Anaheim TMA, Coast Metro TMA, Coastal Motion, Irvine Spectrum TMA, Newport Center TMA, San Clemente TMA

Ventura County East County TMA

Regulatory Environment

The following summarizes the current regulatory environment at the federal, state, regional, and local levels. Over the past year, there has been much legislative activity on the state and regional levels, including amendments to Rule 1501 in April 1995 and the recent passing of SB 437 (John Lewis) in October 1995. Although SB 437 passed, the general consensus seems to be that agencies still have to comply with federal regulations (such as the Clean Air Act), so regional regulations, like Rule 210 (Ventura County) and Rule 1501, will remain in place for the time being. However, governing boards will be expecting more flexibility in policies which relate to trip reduction programs.

An example of how a regional air quality management district is responding to the uncertainty of regulations is by taking a "business as usual" approach until their board reaches a consensus on how to incorporate the new legislation into policies that comply with existing regulations.

Federal Regulations

Federal Clean Air Act (1990)

The Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 require that states with severe and extreme ozone non-attainment areas implement programs which require employers with 100 or more employees to reduce work related vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled. The 1990 Federal Clean Air Act established requirements for states that do not meet air pollution standards. To reduce air pollution, states are required to control pollution from mobile sources. The legislation requires a 15% improvement in air quality in the first six years, with 3% annual average reductions in the following years. The 1990 amendments place new requirements on employers of 100 more people to reduce work-related trips by 25% above the area average.

States with non-attainment areas are to revise their State Implementation Plans (sips) to include strategies for meeting new air quality targets. Violations of federal standards could result in the loss of millions of dollars in federal funding for highway and other infrastructure improvements.

Federal Energy Bill (1992)

The Federal Energy Bill, went into effect on January 1, 1993, raising the tax-exempt employer provided transit subsidy to $60 per month. Only transit subsidies i