Fort Mojave Indian Reservation
Transit Study
Recommendations
April 2, 2014

Historical and Current Inventory

Prepared by:

Prepared for:

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

DISCLAIMER
THIS REPORT HAS BEEN FUNDED IN PART THROUGH GRANTS FROM THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. THE CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE AUTHORS, WHO ARE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FACTS AND THE ACCURACY OF THE DATA, AND FOR THE USE OR ADAPTATION OF PREVIOUSLY
PUBLISHED MATERIAL, PRESENTED HEREIN. THE CONTENTS DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE OFFICIAL VIEWS OR POLICIES
OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OR THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION. THIS REPORT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A STANDARD, SPECIFICATION, OR REGULATION. TRADE OR
MANUFACTURERS’ NAMES THAT MAY APPEAR HEREIN ARE CITED ONLY BECAUSE THEY ARE CONSIDERED ESSENTIAL TO THE
OBJECTIVES OF THE REPORT. THE U.S. GOVERNMENT AND THE STATE OF ARIZONA DO NOT ENDORSE PRODUCTS OR
MANUFACTURERS.

Recommendations

ii

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Table of Contents
1.

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Study Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Study Area .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Recommendations Report Overview ....................................................................................... 3
2. Transit Need and Demand.............................................................................................................. 4
2.1 Population .............................................................................................................................. 4
2.1.1
Population Density........................................................................................................ 4
2.1.2
Median Age .................................................................................................................. 4
2.2 Transit Need ........................................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Transit Demand ...................................................................................................................... 9
2.4 Transit Need as Demonstrated by Responses to Transit Survey ............................................. 10
3. Recommendations ....................................................................................................................... 15
3.1 Transit Mode Analysis ........................................................................................................... 15
3.1 Recommended Alternative.................................................................................................... 15
3.1.1
Interviews with Peer System Tribal Transit Providers ................................................... 18
3.1.2
Proposed Potential Transit Route ................................................................................ 18
3.2 Coordination with Other Transit Providers ............................................................................ 24
3.3 Operations ............................................................................................................................ 25
3.3.1
Vehicle Cycle, Headways, and Options for Service ....................................................... 25
3.3.2
Service Hour Options .................................................................................................. 26
3.3.3
Recommended Service Hour Option ............................................................................ 27
3.3.4
Fares .......................................................................................................................... 28
3.4 Capital Projects ..................................................................................................................... 28
3.4.1
Recommended Bus Size and Type................................................................................ 29
3.4.2
Passenger Amenities ................................................................................................... 29
3.5 Marketing ............................................................................................................................. 29
3.6 Vehicle Maintenance Options ............................................................................................... 30
3.7 Transit Management and Operations .................................................................................... 30
4. Funding Options........................................................................................................................... 31
4.1 Public Transportation on Indian Reservation Program 5311(c) .............................................. 31
4.2 Other Federal Funding Programs........................................................................................... 32
4.3 Other Potential Funding Sources ........................................................................................... 32
Appendix A – Tribal Transit Peer System Interviews ............................................................................ 36
Appendix B – Potential Transit Stop Locations ..................................................................................... 41

Recommendations

iii

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Figures
Figure 1 – Study Area Map .................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2 – Study Area (U.S. Census Tracts) ............................................................................................. 6
Figure 3 – Total Population ................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 4 – Proposed Potential Transit Route ........................................................................................ 19

Tables
Table 1 – Population and Median Age ................................................................................................... 5
Table 2 – Households without Access to a Vehicle ................................................................................. 8
Table 3 – Estimate of Persons with Transportation Needs ..................................................................... 8
Table 4 – Estimate of Reasonable Transit Demand ................................................................................ 9
Table 5 – Alternatives Matrix .............................................................................................................. 16
Table 6 – Stop Locations (in order of route)......................................................................................... 20
Table 7 – Transit System Coordination with other Transportation Providers........................................ 24
Table 8 – Annual Vehicle Service Hours for Various Deviated Fixed Route Service Hour Options ......... 26
Table 9 – Summary Costs for Arizona Transit Systems ......................................................................... 27
Table 10 – Estimated System Non-Capital (Administrative and Operating) Costs ................................. 27
Table 11 – Capital Costs - Transit System Start-up ............................................................................... 29
Table 12 – Federal Grant Programs for Transit-Related Activities ........................................................ 33

Recommendations

iv

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Study Purpose
The Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study evaluates the feasibility of, and provides
recommendations for public transportation service for the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation and
surrounding area. Three primary objectives guided the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study:
1. Enhance the awareness and understanding of community transit needs through data analysis,
stakeholder interviews, and public engagement and participation.
2. Develop feasible, multimodal strategies to increase mobility within the Fort Mojave Indian
Reservation and regional interconnectivity to neighboring communities. These strategies must
address community needs and be implementable and sustainable. Alternatives that were
reviewed included vanpool, demand responsive transit, and fixed-route service. Integration
with existing transit services is an important consideration.
3. Provide a road map for developing and implementing feasible transit service improvement
recommendations. The roadmap includes funding sources that could be used to develop public
transportation services. The roadmap will require collaboration with existing transit providers
to ensure integrated services and logical organization mechanisms to provide effective service.

1.2 Study Area
The Fort Mojave Indian Reservation is located along the Colorado River in the vicinity of Needles,
California. The Reservation covers 32,252 acres in the tri-state area of Arizona, California, and Nevada.
The land is divided into three major segments: 22,037 acres in Arizona; 6,428 acres in California; and
3,787 acres in Nevada. Tribal headquarters are located in Needles, California. The Reservation area is
shown in Figure 1.
The Fort Mojave Indian Tribe lies in between the communities of Fort Mohave and Bullhead City (to
the north), and Needles, CA (to the south).

Recommendations

1

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Figure 1 – Study Area Map

Recommendations

2

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

1.3 Recommendations Report Overview
This report provides alternatives and recommendations for a start-up transit service to serve the Fort
Mojave Indian Reservation and surrounding area. This report is organized into the following chapters:
Chapter 1: Introduction – This chapter provides an overview of the study including purpose and goals.
Chapter 2: Transit Need and Demand – This chapter provides an estimate of transit needs and
demand for trips consistent with methodology contained in Transit Cooperative Research (TCR)
Program, Report 161: Methods for Forecasting Demand and Quantifying Need for Rural Passenger
Transportation: Final Workbook.
Chapter 3: Recommended Transit Mode, Transit Route, and Transit Operations Options – This
chapter provides a recommendation for the recommended transit mode. It presents a proposed
transit route to serve key transit nodes, activity centers, and corridors. Transit operations options are
also discussed. This chapter summarizes start-up capital costs.
Chapter 4: Funding Options – This chapter summarizes funding options.

Historical and Current Inventory

3

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

2. TRANSIT NEED AND DEMAND
This chapter provides an estimate of need and demand for a potential public transportation system
serving Fort Mojave Indian Reservation and the surrounding community. The analysis of need and
demand informs determination of needed and feasible transit service options.
Need and demand estimates are based on the methodology contained in TCRP Report 161: Methods
for Forecasting Demand and Quantifying Need for Rural Passenger Transportation: Final Workbook.
This methodology utilizes U.S. Census data and requires that an analysis area be defined consistent
with U.S. Census geography.
A potential public transportation system may serve both Tribal residents and visitors, and non-Tribal
residents who live in areas near and around Fort Mojave Indian Reservation. Since the Fort Mojave
Indian Reservation is in a checkerboard layout, the needs analysis is based not only on the population
in the Reservation area, but also considers residents who live in non-Tribal areas near and around the
Fort Mojave Indian Reservation. Census tracts which are included in the analysis area are: 9405.01,
9520.04, 9550, 9520.02, 9520.03, and 251 (refer to Figure 2). Note that some of these Census Tracts
are very large, but contain large areas of land that are uninhabited.

2.1 Population
The 2010 U.S. Census population on the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe Reservation is 1,657 persons. The
population of the surrounding community (U.S. Census Tracts as identified in Figure 2) is nearly 25,000
people as listed in Table 1.

2.1.1 Population Density
Population densities within the Fort Mojave Reservation and surrounding area are shown in Figure 3.
The densest population areas are shown in the darker brown shading and include:


Arizona Village area (north of Plantation Road and east of SR 95)



California Village (West Broadway Road, west of SR 95 in Needles, CA)



Avi Resort and Casino area (west of SR 95 and Colorado River, along Aztec Road)



SR 95 corridor, between Lipan Blvd and Bullhead City

2.1.2 Median Age
A review of population data indicates the following population trends:


The median age of each zip code ranges from 44 years old to 55 years old, as presented in
Table 1.



Approximately 25% of the population is 65 and over, indicating a large group with a propensity
for using transit.



Another 25% of the population is 50-64 years old—a population group that is nearing
retirement age.



Approximately 20% of the population is under the age of 18 years old. This growing segment
of younger population will be entering the workforce and will be suitable for education efforts
to encourage transit use.

Historical and Current Inventory

4

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Table 1 – Population and Median Age
Census Tract
9405.01
9520.02
9520.03
9520.04
9550
251
TOTAL

Population

Median Age

3,269
6,626
4,763
3,512
5,405
1,196
24,771

47.7
55.1
44.7
52.3
41.7
48.1
-

Sources: U.S Census, Table B01003 and Table B01002, 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates,

Historical and Current Inventory

5

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Note: The transit needs analysis was based on population and demographic data within the above-listed census tracts.

Figure 2 – Study Area (U.S. Census Tracts)

6

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Source: 2010 US Census

Figure 3 – Total Population
7

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

2.2 Transit Need
Procedures as described in TCR Program Report 161 – Method for Forecasting Demand and
Quantifying Need for Rural Passenger Transportation: Final Workbook were applied to available
socioeconomic data and information.
According to TCRP Report 161, transit needs are defined in two ways:
(1) The number of people in a given area likely to need passenger transportation, and
(2) The number of trips required to provide individuals without personal vehicles with a level of
mobility equal to those having personal vehicles.
The number of people in a given area likely to need passenger transportation: Estimates for transit
need are represented by the number of persons residing in households with income below the
poverty level plus the number of persons residing in households with no vehicles. These data are
summarized in Table 2 and Table 3. It is estimated that approximately 500 persons have transit needs
on the Reservation area, and approximately 5,000 persons have need of transit services in the
surrounding area.

Table 2 – Households without Access to a Vehicle

1-person households
2-person households
3-person households
4-or-more person households
TOTAL

Number of Households
(Fort Mojave Indian
Reservation)
23
16
2
9
50 households

Number of Households
Entire Area (Census
Tracts)
224
157
50
11
442 households

Sources: U.S Census American Community Survey Table B08201, 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Table 3 – Estimate of Persons with Transportation Needs

Persons residing in households with income
below the poverty level
Persons residing in households without
access to a vehicle
Total Persons in Need of Passenger
Transportation Services

Number of Persons (Fort
Mojave Indian
Reservation)
446

Number of Persons –
Entire Area (Census
Tracts)
4,265

97

732

543

4,997

Sources: U.S Census American Community Survey Tables B17001 and B08201, 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-Year
Estimates

The number of trips required to provide individuals without personal vehicles with a level of
mobility equal to those having personal vehicles: The need, expressed in trips, is estimated using a
factor called the mobility gap. The mobility gap is the total number of trips not taken because

Recommendations

8

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

members of zero vehicle households do not have the ease of mobility available to members of
households with ready access to a vehicle. The mobility gap was developed from data in the 2009
National Household Travel Survey for each Census Division and is presented in TCRP 161. A mobility
gap estimate based on household vehicle availability, with the gap measured in trips per day, is
computed as:
Need (one-way trips per day) = Number of households having no car x mobility gap
Since most of the Reservation is located in Arizona and Nevada, the Mountain Division mobility gap
value was used. The Mountain Division mobility gap was estimated by the TCRP Report 161 to be 0.8.
Using this formula, the need in trips is estimated to be:
Need = 442 households having no car x 0.8 = 350 one-way trips per day (106,100 trips per year)
Having an estimate of the number of trips to be served within the analysis area is a way to quantify the
resources that would be needed to meet the unserved demand.

2.3 Transit Demand
TCRP Report 161 emphasizes that the estimate of need made using the mobility gap method are
typically greater than the number of trips actually observed on rural passenger transportation systems
and are likely greater than the demand that would be generated for any practical level of service. TCRP
Report 161 states that much of the remaining trip-based mobility gap is likely filled by friends and
relatives driving residents of non-car-owning households. The report suggests that, at best, only
about 20% of the mobility gap trip-based needs is typically met.
Based on analysis of data reported to the Rural National Transit Database for 2009, TCRP Report 161
developed a function to produce reasonable estimates of the demand for general public, or nonprogram, passenger transportation in rural areas:
Demand = (2.20 × Population age 60+) + (5.21 × Mobility Limited Population age 18 to 64) +
(1.52 × Residents of Households having No Vehicle)
This method, the results of which are presented in Table 4, estimates the demand for “non-program
related passenger transportation” (i.e., transportation not resulting from participation in a particular
social-service program).

Table 4 – Estimate of Reasonable Transit Demand

Population Age 60+
Mobility Limited Population age 18 to 64
Residents of Households having No Vehicle
Non-program related passenger transportation demand 1

Number of Persons – Entire Area
(Census Tracts)
8,188
662
732
22,600 Trips per Year

1. Demand = (2.20 × 8,188 Population Age 60+) + (5.21 × 662 Mobility Limited Population age 18 to 64) + (1.52 ×
732 Residents of Households having No Vehicle) = 22,600 Trips per Year
Sources: U.S Census American Community Survey Tables B101001, S1810, and B08201, 2008-2012 American Community
Survey 5-Year Estimates

Recommendations

9

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

2.4 Transit Need as Demonstrated by Responses to Transit
Survey
As part of public outreach activities conducted during the study, a transit survey was distributed and
made available online. Although not all respondents answered all questions, survey responses varied
from 118 to 412 responses. Provided below is a brief overview of the survey responses (it should be
noted that percentages do not always sum to 100 due to rounding).
1. How many people currently live in your household?
Answer Choices
1
2
3
4
5
Total

Responses
63
172
56
63
39
393

Percent
16
44
14
16
10

The majority of respondents live in two person households.
2. Please indicate your age range.
Answer Choices
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75-85
Over 85
Total

Responses
44
66
53
66
69
70
42
8
418

Percent
11
16
13
16
17
17
10
2.0

The survey responses were fairly well distributed between the age ranges.
3. How many working vehicles are available in your household?
Answer Choices
1
2
3
Total

Responses
198
138
48
384

Percent
52
36
13

All of the survey respondents that answered this question had at least one working vehicle in their
household.

Recommendations

10

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

4. How do you currently get to the places you want to go?
Answer Choices
I drive myself
Take a taxi or shuttle
Walk
Bike
Catch a ride with friend or
family member
Carpool
Other
Total

Responses
329
16
14
0
47

Percent
78
4
3
0
11

9
8
423

2
2

Although the majority of respondents drive themselves to their destinations, a significant
percentage of persons catch as ride with friends or family or carpool. These persons may be a
potential market for transit.
5. How many times have you been unable to reach a destination in the past 30 days because of
lack of transportation?
Answer Choices
1-3 times
4-6 times
7 or more times
Total

Responses
167
38
24
229

Percent
73
17
10

229 respondents indicated that they were unable to reach a destination because of lack of
transportation. 62 persons were unable to reach a destination 4 or more times in a month,
indicating a potential need for transit.
6. What are your limitations on travel?
Answer Choices
No car
Limited availability of car
Too expensive
Road problems
Physical disability
Other
Total

Responses
50
78
64
7
19
40
258

Percent
19
30
25
3
7
16

Most of the persons responding to this question had either no car, a limited availability of car, or
felt it was too expensive to drive.

Recommendations

11

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

7. What are your top five locations that you need travel assistance with?
Answers
Work
Grocery Store (responded either Smith’s, Safeway, Bashas or
grocery or market)
Avi Resort and Casino
Doctor appt. / medical / clinic
Hospital or Valley View Medical Center
Home, family or friends
Walmart / Target
Other store or shopping
Fort Mojave / Tribal departments
Post Office
Mohave Community College
Bank
School
Bullhead City
Fort Mohave
Needles
Lake Havasu
Las Vegas
Laughlin
Library
WIC
Other
Total

Responses Percent
91
13
105
15
35
79
14
17
39
67
4
5
9
13
23
20
10
6
5
10
16
6
3
132
709

5
11
2
2
6
9
1
1
1
2
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
<1
19

The most common travel destinations were work; shopping at Smith’s, Safeway or another
market; Avi Resort and Casino; medical trips; and other types of shopping trips.
8. If public transportation were available, would you use it?
Answer Choices
Yes
No
Total

Responses
273
118
380

Percent
70
30

The majority of respondents, almost 70% or 273 persons, indicated they would use public
transportation if available.
9. What area do you live in?
Answer Choices
Arizona Village
California Village
Bullhead City

Recommendations

Responses
95
27
34

Percent
24
7
9

12

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Desert Springs
10
Mohave Valley
20
Needles
12
Plantation Road
6
Other Locations along Hwy 34
95
Other Locations
153
Total
391

3
5
3
2
9
39

Most of the respondents that answered this question lived in Arizona Village. A significant number of
respondents lived in California Village, near SR 95, and in Bullhead City.
10. What would you most likely use public transportation for?
Answer Choices
Work
School/ Education
Recreation
Appointments
Shopping
Other
Total

Responses
192
63
91
166
197
54
328

Percent
59
19
28
51
60
16

Top destinations included work, shopping, and appointments.

Recommendations

13

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

11. What is your occupation?
Answer Choices
Student
Tribal / Government
employee
Casino/resort
Non-working spouse
Retired
Unemployed
Homemaker
Caregiver
Other employment
Total

Responses
8
40

Percent
2
10

169
5
122
13
3
2
52
414

41
1
29
3
1
<1
13

The largest response to this question was casino/resort employment, followed by retired, and then
Tribal government employment. This indicates that a transit system should definitely serve the
casinos on the Reservation, as well as the Tribal government offices.
Summary
Over 400 individuals responded to the transit survey and demonstrated that there is support for a
transit system, and need based on the number of persons unable to reach a destination over the
last month. It also confirmed transit system origins and destinations identified earlier in the
project.

Recommendations

14

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

3. RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Transit Mode Analysis
A number of transit modes were examined to determine the best “fit” for the Fort Mojave area. These
include a demand-responsive system, fixed route system, deviated fixed route system, and a vanpool
service.
Brief overviews of these service types are:


Demand-responsive transit service – A demand-response system is one where passenger trips
are generated by calls from passengers or their agents to the transit operator, who then
dispatches a vehicle to pick up passengers and transport them to their destinations.



Fixed route service – the bus travels over an established route, with fixed times for stops.



Deviated fixed route service – A deviated fixed route service operates a bus or van along a
fixed route and keeps to a timetable, but the bus or van can deviate from the route to go to a
specific location. Deviation, when provided, should be limited to a maximum number of
deviations per day. Zones should also be provided within which deviation will be provided.



Vanpool service – a type of car pool utilizing a van that usually transports six to 15 passengers,
typically for work trips.

These transit options were evaluated by reviewing anticipated passenger demand, need for
complementary Americans with Disability Act (ADA) paratransit service, service area characteristics,
and passenger needs. Considerations of each of these factors are summarized in Table 5.
It should be mentioned that the need for ADA complementary transit service is required for
passengers who are 1) unable to navigate the public bus system, 2) unable to get to a point from which
they could access the public bus system, or 3) have a temporary need for these services because of
injury or some type of limited duration cause of disability.

3.1 Recommended Alternative
Based on the analysis of demands, passenger needs and service area characteristics, a deviated fixed
route service is recommended to serve the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation and the surrounding area.
Deviated fixed route typically provide a higher level of riders than a demand-responsive type service.
The route deviation element of the service would satisfy the requirements for providing transit to
those who cannot travel to the bus stop within a certain distance.
A proposed route is described in the following sections. Deviation, when provided, should be limited
to a maximum number of deviations per day. Zones should also be specified within which deviation
will be provided.

Recommendations

15

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Table 5 – Alternatives Matrix
Service Type

Criteria
Demand

Need for ADA
Complementary
Paratransit
Service

DemandResponsive

Approximately 350
one-way trips per
day – larger than
typical demand
responsive
productivity of five
passengers per
hour

This type of
service will meet
ADA
requirements

Fixed Route

Approximately 350
one-way trips per
day. The demand
appears
appropriate to a
fixed route service

Deviated
Fixed Route

Approximately 350
one-way trips per
day. The demand
appears
appropriate to a
fixed route

Recommendations

Service Area
Characteristics

Conclusions
Passenger Needs

Costs

The main
destinations
are oriented
along SR 95

A high number of
employee trips,
shopping trips, and
medical/appointment
trips is anticipated.
Fixed route service
would better meet
these needs.

Typically
demandresponsive
systems are
more costly than
fixed routes
services. This
type of service
also requires real
time dispatching.

The main destinations are
oriented along SR 95,
which is more suited to a
fixed route system. Since
there is a higher level of
employee trips, a fixed
route service may better
meet those needs

ADA paratransit
service needed in
addition to the
fixed route
service.

The main
destinations
are oriented
along SR 95.

A high number of
employee trips,
shopping trips, and
medical/appointment
trips is anticipated.

The service
typically
generates more
revenues since it
accommodates
more passengers

The main destinations are
oriented along SR 95,
which is more suited to a
fixed route system. Since
there is a higher level of
employee trips, a fixed
route service may better
meet those needs

The deviated
element of the
service would
meet ADA
requirements for
a complementary

The main
destinations
are oriented
along SR 95.

A high number of
employee trips,
shopping trips, and
medical/appointment
trips is anticipated.
Fixed route with

This type of
service requires
real time
dispatching to
accommodate
route deviation

This is the same as Fixed
Route but provides
opportunity for deviation
to meet ADA requirements.

16

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Service Type

Van Pool

Criteria
Demand

Need for ADA
Complementary
Paratransit
Service

service. Having the
option for a
deviated service
will better meet
the needs of this
rural community

service since the
bus could deviate
to pick up
passengers with
disabilities.

Although
commuter trips
are expected to be
a large component
of demand, there
will also be
demand for other
types

A vanpool
typically provides
more point-topoint service

Recommendations

Service Area
Characteristics

Main
destinations
for a van pool
service are
anticipated to
be the Avi
Resort and
Casino – a
major
employment
destination

Conclusions
Passenger Needs

Costs

deviation would
satisfy ADA
requirements.

requests.

Vanpool service is
typically limited to
individuals signing up
for the program.

Normally a
transit agency
owns and
maintains the
vehicles and
individuals share
the driving costs,
and sometimes
share the
driving.

The transit service is
anticipated to serve a
broader range of needs
than a typical vanpool
service.

17

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

3.1.1 Interviews with Peer System Tribal Transit Providers
Telephone interviews were conducted with two Tribal transit system providers, the Salt River Transit
System and the Navajo Transit System, to provide insights on their systems that can be of value to the
Fort Mojave Indian Reservation. These interviews are summarized in Appendix A.

3.1.2 Proposed Potential Transit Route
A potential transit route was developed through a review of residential areas and key destinations
within the community. The route was developed based on input from the Tribal Planner, stakeholders,
and the public. Key features of the route are:










Serves the main residential communities of California Village and Arizona Village.
Serves Tribal Offices on Merriman Avenue in Needles.
Serves Tribal government areas on SR 95 such as the Police, Tribal Courts, and Building
Department.
Connects to Bullhead Area Transit System and Needles Area Transit System.
Serves the Valley View Medical Center (also a future stop for the Bullhead Area Transit System)
and the Fort Mojave Medical Center on Plantation Road.
Serves grocery and shopping destinations such as Smith’s and Safeway.
Serves the Aha Macav High School and Builders Academy High School.
Serves the Spirit Mountain Casino.
Serves community facilities such as the Boys and Girls Club, One–Stop Center, Social Services,
Library, and Fort Mojave Education Center.

The fixed route and stops are shown in Figure 4 and summarized in Table 6.
Aerial views of each potential bus stop location are shown in Appendix B. Potential locations are
shown for planning purposes only.
Since travel time on SR 95 is rather lengthy, it is recommended that flag stops occur on SR 95 between
Willow Drive and Lipan Boulevard. Flag stops are often implemented instead of standard bus stops,
allowing passengers to wait along the side of the road at a convenient location that may not
necessarily be a designated bus stop. When the bus encounters a passenger waiting alongside the
road, the bus driver can use their professional judgment to determine whether it is safe enough to
stop at that location. Specific policies for drivers and passengers to use for determining when and
where it is safe to pick-up or discharge passengers should be developed during implementation
planning. The final locations of transit stops will be determined during detailed implementation
planning.
Figure 4 shows two alternative route extension options that may be considered: A) extend north to
Target and connects to Bullhead Area Transit System; B) extend west to Avi Resort and Casino. These
options should be evaluated during implementation planning to determine the impact to headways
and capital requirements.

Recommendations

18

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Figure 4 – Proposed Potential Transit Route
Recommendations

19

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Table 6 – Stop Locations (in order of route)
Stop
Identification
Number

Intersection

Stop Location

Activity Center Served

Distance Between Stops (feet)

Existing Amenities

NS=Near side
FS=Far side
MB=Mid-block

Outbound

Between Stops

Distance
(feet)

1

Merriman Avenue at
Goodman Rd/O Street

NS

Tribal Offices at 500
Merriman Avenue

---

Sidewalk on south side of
Merriman–not on north side

2- Transfer
point with
NAT

O Street at Needles
Highway / River Rd -

NS

KFC Restaurant, River Valley
Inn, California Village

Stop ID 1 to 2

1,317

No sidewalk and there is
some elevation challenges

3

River Rd (Needles Highway)
at M Street

NS

California Village

Stop ID 2 to 3

674

Sidewalk

4

River Rd (Needles Highway)
at SR 95

NS

Riverhead Plaza, California
Village, L&S Autocare, The
Sweet Spot Shaved Ice

Stop ID 3 to 4

754

Sidewalk

5

Plantation Road at Sands
Road

NS

Ava Ich Asiit Tribal Library,
Social Services, Medical
Center, Boys and Girls Club
of the Aha Macav

Stop ID 4 to 5

6,159

Gravel shoulder

6

Plantation Road at Mint
Road

NS

Arizona Village homes

Stop ID 5 to 6

2,680

Gravel shoulder

7

Plantation Road at Peck
Road

NS

Arizona Village homes

Stop ID 6 to 7:

1,708

Gravel shoulder

8

Roosevelt Rd west of Scott
Circle

FS

Arizona Village homes, Aha
Macav Housing Entity

Stop ID 7 to 8:

877

Curb–no sidewalk

9

Plantation Rd at Alexander
Lane (Mint Rd)

FS

Arizona Village homes

Stop ID 8 to 9:

1,479

Gravel shoulder

(Bus stop 20 for Needles
Area Transit)

Recommendations

20

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study
Stop
Identification
Number

Intersection

Stop Location

Activity Center Served

Distance Between Stops (feet)

Existing Amenities

NS=Near side
FS=Far side
MB=Mid-block

Outbound

Between Stops

Distance
(feet)

10

Plantation Rd at Sands Rd

FS

Ava Ich Asiit Tribal Library,
Social Services, Medical
Center, Boys and Girls Club
of the Aha Macav

Stop ID 9 to 10:

2,686

Gravel shoulder

11

SR95 at Willow Drive

FS

Hunters Grill, Chase Bank,
Spirit Mountain Casino,
Business Center, One Stop
Center, WIA

Stop ID 10 to 11:

21,829

Curb–no sidewalk –
signalized intersection

12

SR 95 at Lipan Blvd

FS

Builders Academy High
School

Stop ID 11 to 12:

26,588

No sidewalk–signalized
intersection

13

Valley View Medical Center
– possible future transfer
point to Bullhead Area
Transit System

Front door of
Medical Center

Valley View Medical Center

Stop ID 12 to 13:

7,027

Stop at entry to Medical
Center

14

Aztec Rd at SR 95

FS

Smith’s Grocery Store

Stop ID 13 to 14:

5,868

No sidewalk except at
corners of signalized
intersection.

Total Distance, Outbound

85,514

Inbound
15

SR95 at Courtney Place

NS

Safeway Grocery Store

Stop ID 14 to 15:

1,258

13

Valley View Medical Center
– future transfer point to
Bullhead Area Transit
System

Front door of
Medical Center

Valley View Medical Center

Stop ID 15 to 13:

5,408

Recommendations

Stop at entry to Medical
Center–this direction
assumes exit via Wagon
Wheel Lane

21

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study
Stop
Identification
Number

Intersection

Stop Location

Activity Center Served

Distance Between Stops (feet)

Existing Amenities

NS=Near side
FS=Far side
MB=Mid-block

Outbound

Between Stops

Distance
(feet)

16

SR 95 at Lipan Blvd

FS

Builders Academy High
School

Stop ID 13 to 16:

7,670

No sidewalk- signalized
intersection

17

SR95 at Willow Drive

FS

Hunters Grill, Chase Bank,
Spirit Mountain Casino,
Business Center, One Stop
Center, WIA

Stop ID 16 to 17:

26,531

Curb–no sidewalk

5

Plantation Road at Sands
Road

Ava Ich Asiit Tribal Library,
Social Services, Medical
Center, Boys and Girls Club
of the Aha Macav

Stop ID 17 to 5:

21,546

Gravel Shoulder

6

Plantation Road at Mint
Road

NS

Arizona Village homes

Stop ID 5 to 6

2,680

Gravel shoulder

7

Plantation Road at Peck
Road

NS

Arizona Village homes

Stop ID 6 to 7:

1,708

Gravel shoulder

8

Roosevelt Rd west of Scott
Circle

FS

Arizona Village homes, Aha
Macav Housing Entity

Stop ID 7 to 8:

877

Curb–no sidewalk

9

Plantation Rd at Alexander
Lane (Mint Rd)

FS

Arizona Village homes

Stop ID 8 to 9:

1,479

Gravel shoulder

10

Plantation Rd at Sands Rd

FS

Ava Ich Asiit Tribal Library,
Social Services, Medical
Center, Boys and Girls Club
of the Aha Macav

Stop ID 9 to 10:

2,686

Gravel shoulder

18

River Rd (Needles Highway)
at SR 95

FS

Riverhead Plaza, California
Village, L& S Autocare, The
Sweet Spot Shaved Ice

Stop ID 10 to 18:

6,248

Sidewalk

Recommendations

22

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study
Stop
Identification
Number

Intersection

Stop Location

Activity Center Served

Distance Between Stops (feet)

Existing Amenities

NS=Near side
FS=Far side
MB=Mid-block

Outbound

Between Stops

Distance
(feet)

19

River Rd (Needles Highway)
at M Street

NS

California Village

Stop ID 18 to 19:

540

Sidewalk

20- transfer
point for
NAT

O Street at Needles
Highway (Bus stop 20 for
Needles Area Transit)

FS

KFC Restaurant, River Valley
Inn, California Village

Stop ID 19 to 20:

860

Sidewalk at corner, but not
at bus stop

21

Merriman Avenue at
Goodman Rd/O Street

Tribal Offices at 500
Merriman Avenue

Stop ID 20 to 21:

1337

Stop may need to be in
parking lot east of Tribal
Offices

Total distance, Inbound

74,960

Grand Total, Inbound and Outbound
routes

160,474 or
30.4 miles

Recommendations

23

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

3.2 Coordination with Other Transit Providers
In addition to serving Fort Mojave origins and destinations, the proposed transit system will link both
the Needles Area Transit System and the Bullhead Area Transit System (at least when the route serves
the Valley View Medical Center in the future), which will potentially increase ridership on both of
those systems. In addition, the proposed transit system will enhance and supplement the operation of
other transportation providers in the community. A brief overview of how this route could potentially
coordinate with other transportation providers is summarized in Table 7.

Table 7 – Transit System Coordination with other Transportation Providers
Provider

How a Fort Mojave Transit System would Potential Benefits
Coordinate with this Provider

Needles Area
Transit

The proposed transit system would stop at
Bus Stop 20 of the Needles Area transit
system (O Street at Needles Highway)

Allow transfers to occur between the
two systems.

Bullhead Area
Transit System

The route will coordinate with future service
to the Valley View Medical Center

In the future, will allow transfers to
occur between the two systems at the
Valley View Medical Center. An option
for service may be to extend the route
to Target.

Avi Resort and
Casino

Fort Mojave transit system would serve
Arizona and California Village locations and
travel to the intersection of SR 95 and Aztec
Road (Safeway and Smith’s), where
employees could take the casino shuttle
service to work.

The employee shuttle service routes
could be shortened considerably, or
potentially eliminated, by using the Ft.
Mojave transit system.

Workforce
Investment Act

Transit stops are proposed at Arizona Village
and California Village and employment sites
such as Tribal Courts and Police, One-Stop
Business Center, Valley View Medical Center,
Safeway, Smith’s and the Avi Resort and
Casino.

This may reduce the need to provide
transportation services to
employment locations.

Boys and Girls Club
of Aha Macav

The transit service will stop at the Boys and
Girls Club and at Arizona Village and
California Village

May reduce need for van service,
particularly for teens.

Education
Department

The proposed route will serve the Education
Department on Plantation Road

May reduce needs for van service to
Arizona and California Village.

Recreation
Department

The proposed route will serve the Recreation
Department at 500 Merriman Avenue

May reduce needs for van service to
Arizona and California Village.

Recommendations

24

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Provider

How a Fort Mojave Transit System would Potential Benefits
Coordinate with this Provider

Indian Health
Service

The proposed route serves the Valley View
Medical Center and Fort Mojave Indian
Health

Although Community Health
representatives transport clients to
patient care, a transit system could
supplement this, especially for trips to
Valley View Medical Center and Fort
Mojave Indian Health.

Senior Nutrition
Program

The proposed route will serve Arizona and
California Village, grocery stores, and the Fort
Mojave Indian Health and Valley View
Medical Center

May decrease use of vans to transport
tribal members to grocery stores and
medical appointments

Fort Mojave
Domestic Violence

Will serve the Tribal Courts area

Provides access to this area from
Arizona and California Villages

Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates

3.3 Operations
3.3.1 Vehicle Cycle, Headways, and Options for Service
The cycle time on the proposed route is equal to the sum of:
1. One-way trip time (Smiths at Aztec Road/ SR 95, to Tribal Headquarters at 500 Merriman
Avenue) is estimated at approximately 25 minutes, which equates to an approximate
round trip of 50 minutes.
2. Total number of stops along the alignment:
a. 21 stops *151 seconds per stop = 5.25 minutes
b. 5 stops * 30 seconds per stop = 2.5 minutes
c. 2 stops * 60 seconds per stop = 2 minutes
Total dwell time: 9.75 minutes
3. Recovery/layover time is assumed to be approximately 7 minutes.
The above sums to a cycle time of approximately 60 to 70 minutes. Additional field work is required to
more precisely estimate average speed. Additional cycle time may be required to account for route
1

Note: This represents a planning-level estimate of dwell time. Additional investigation is required upon
determination of the number of stops, bus type, etc. Assumptions are: 15 seconds average dwell time for a
typical stop in outlying area, 30 seconds for a major stop in outlying area, and 60 seconds for a transfer center or
major in-line transfer point. Reference: Bus Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, Part 2, Bus Capacity,
page 2-15.

Recommendations

25

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

deviation. In addition, implementation of Option A or Option B (extensions to Avi Casino and to
Target, refer to Figure 4) would increase the cycle time. Depending upon the final route configuration,
a single bus may potentially provide a service on one hour headway if average speed is increased, or
the route is shortened. Two buses would are likely required to provide hourly service. Detailed
operational planning is required to determine the cycle time and bus headway.

3.3.2 Service Hour Options
There are a number of options for operating the system:


All day service – this service would run from approximately 6 am to 6 pm, 12 hours and 5 days
a week. Initially, it is recommended that service begin on a trial basis with reduced hours; as
the system matures and is proven to be successful, service hours could be expanded to 12
hours per day.



Peak hour service – this service would operate 6 hours per day and 5 days per week.



Express service – this service would operate with limited stops, on one hour headway, Monday
through Friday, to cover the three shift changes at the Avi Resort and Casino (6 am, 2 pm, 10
pm).

A summary of annual vehicle service hours for each of these service options is summarized in Table 8.

Table 8 – Annual Vehicle Service Hours for Various Deviated Fixed Route Service Hour
Options
Service Hour
Option

Service
Hours per
Day

Days per
Week

Deviated Fixed Route, All-day Service
1 vehicle
12
5
2 vehicles
12
5
Deviated Fixed Route, Peak Hour Service
1 vehicle
6
5
2 vehicles
6
5
Deviated Fixed Route, Express Service
1 vehicle
3
5
2 vehicles
3
5

Weeks per
Year

Service
Hours per
Vehicle

Vehicl
es

Total
Vehicle
Service
Hours

52
52

3120
3120

1
2

3120
6240

52
52

1560
1560

1
2

1560
3120

52
52

780
780

1
2

780
1560

Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates

A review of operating costs for other peer-system transit providers in Arizona was made. These data
are summarized in Table 9. The Salt River system is operated by the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian
Community. An interview with operators of the Salt River Transit System is provided in Appendix A.
Applying the average cost per vehicle service hour to the Fort Mojave service options results in the
estimated operating and administrative costs shown in Table 10. Capital costs are not reflected, but
are addressed in Section 3.4.
Recommendations

26

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

3.3.3 Recommended Service Hour Option
It is recommended that the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe begin small and simple, and then gradually grow
the system as demand is demonstrated. For example, the service could begin with peak-hour service
that operates for 2 hours in the morning, midday, and afternoon, and scheduled to coincide with shift
changes at the Avi Resort and Casino. As demand is demonstrated, and the system becomes
successful, the service could be expanded to 8 hours per day, and eventually to 12 hours per day.

Table 9 – Summary Costs for Arizona Transit Systems
Transit
Provider

Benson
Coolidge

Douglas
Kingman
Salt River

Service Type

Deviated
fixed route
Deviated
fixed route
and fixed
route
Deviated
fixed route
Deviated
fixed route
Demand
Response
Average

Annual
Vehicle
Revenue
Hours
3,286

Cost per
Passenger trip

One-way
Trips

Cost per
mile

Cost per
Vehicle
Service Hour

10.92

8,038

3.43

42.33

11,897

18.35

40,370

3.71

60.94

8,600

9.27

-

4.54

52.83

14,055

7.24

-

3.79

49.88

8,544

24.63

-

3.59

68.60

3.81

54.92

14.08

Source: ADOT

Table 10 – Estimated System Non-Capital (Administrative and Operating) Costs
Service Type

Number of
Vehicles

Total Vehicle
Service Hours

Fixed Route with Deviated All Day Service
1 bus vehicle
1
3120
2 bus vehicles
2
6240

Average Cost
per Vehicle
Service Hour

Total Administrative and
Operating Costs

54.92
54.92

$171,000
$343,000

Peak Hour Service
1 bus vehicle
2 bus vehicles
Express Service
1 bus vehicle
2 bus vehicles

1
2

1560
3120

54.92
54.92

$86,000
$172,000

1
2

780
1560

54.92
54.92

$43,000
$86,000

Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates
Note: Costs are rounded to the nearest thousand dollars

Recommendations

27

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

3.3.4 Fares
It is recommended that transit fares be consistent with transit fares of surrounding area systems.
Currently, transit fares for the Bullhead Area Transit System and the Needles Area Transit System are:

•

Bullhead Area Transit System:
o $1.00 Fixed route one-way
o $2.00 Paratransit Service one-way
o $1.00 Paratransit Service Laughlin Connection, free for Personal Care Attendant
o $4.00 All-day Pass for Fixed Route Service
o $48.00 Monthly Pass for Fixed Route Service
o $30.00 Monthly Pass for Seniors age 60 and over for Fixed Route Service
o $20.00 Monthly Pass for Students for Fixed Route Service
o $24.00 Coupon Book (30 one dollar tickets) for Fixed or Paratransit Service
o Children age 2 and younger are free

•

Needles Area Transit System:
o $1.10 Fixed route One-Way
o Fixed Route Service; Senior Over 60 Years Old and Persons With Disabilities; Per each
boarding: $1.00
o 30 Punch Card Pass; Per each boarding: $31.50
o $1.60 Route Deviations Service one-way – there is a phone number to call for route
deviation requests and if time allows, the bus will deviate off its regular route to
accommodate the request.
o $1.50 Route Deviations Service one-way for transit riders over 60 years old and
persons with disabilities

It recommended that the following fare schedule be initially used:
o
o
o
o
o

$1.00 Fixed route one-way
$4.00 All-day Pass for Fixed Route Service
$48.00 Monthly Pass for Fixed Route Service
$30.00 Monthly Pass for Seniors age 60 and over for Fixed Route Service
$20.00 Monthly Pass for Students for Fixed Route Service

In the future, there is potential for a joint transit pass that could be used to link rides between the
three transit systems. Note that Needles Area Transit fare structure for additional cost for deviations
should be considered within a Fort Mojave Transit System. Representatives from Needles Area Transit
also indicated that they have been more successful with their punch card system than they were with
monthly passes.

3.4 Capital Projects
A summary of anticipated capital projects and costs for a startup transit system is provided in Table 11.
These costs do not include the cost of office space, maintenance facilities, and supplies, which is
dependent on the type of transit management and operations.

Recommendations

28

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

3.4.1 Recommended Bus Size and Type
A 24 passenger cutaway bus is recommended for transit operations. According to a 2007 study “An
Evaluation of the Market for Small to Medium Sized Cutaway Buses” for the Federal Highway
Administration, small-to-medium-sized cutaway vehicles represent a significant segment of the bus
market in the United States. Consisting of a bus-body attached to a small-to-medium sized truck or van
chassis, a cutaway vehicle is smaller than a conventional bus while providing more space, particularly
for wheelchairs, compared to other small-to-medium sized vehicle options.
As shopping is anticipated to be one of the primary reasons that people would use the transit system,
buses should safely accommodate carry-on items.

3.4.2 Passenger Amenities
Bus stop signs will need to be erected at all designated bus stop locations. At larger bus stop locations
and locations where right-of-way is available to provide a bus shelter, these can encourage ridership
particularly during the summer months. Capital cost assumes bus shelters at 21 stop locations.

Table 11 – Capital Costs - Transit System Start-up
Project Name

Description

Unit cost

Total Cost ($)

Operations Plan for
Transit System

Study – Development of
detailed operating plan

$25,000

$25,000

2 Ford Chassis Cutaway
Buses

2 transit buses for start-up
of transit system, lift
equipped, with fare-boxes

$93,200

$186,400

Bus stop signs

21 bus stop signs

$100

$2,100

Bus shelters

21 bus shelters

$12,000

$252,000

Bus schedules

1,000 bus schedules

$2.00

$2,000

GIS/GPS tracking and
dispatch system

On each bus (2)

Total capital costs

$25,000

$492,000

3.5 Marketing
Initial marketing efforts for the transit system could include distribution of printed bus schedules,
posters of the bus schedules and fares at tribal offices and community locations, plus posting of the
bus schedules and bus services news on the Tribal website: http://mojaveindiantribe.com/tribal-news/

Recommendations

29

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

3.6 Vehicle Maintenance Options
Options for vehicle maintenance include:

•

In-house maintenance – provide bus maintenance through the vehicle maintenance services of
the Fort Mojave tribe.

•

Contract to use the services of a nearby jurisdiction or school district

•

Contract with the Needles Area Transit System or the Bullhead Area Transit System to provide
vehicle maintenance.

3.7 Transit Management and Operations
Options for transit management and operations are:
1. Operate directly within the Tribe – a transit system could operate as a new Tribal Department
or as a service of an existing Tribal Department. Some implications of these options are:

•

New Tribal department – This would provide an opportunity to coordinate other
transportation provided through the Tribe. The department would need dedicated floor
space, equipment, staff, etc.

•

Operate as a service of an existing department – a new transit service could potentially
operate as part of the Roads department, or the Social Service Department, or the
Planning Department. Advantages would be more opportunities to coordinate with the
services and resources of the department.

2. Hire an independent contractor to operate the transit system – This option involves
contracting with an outside firm to provide transit management. Considerations for using a
transit contract provider:

•

Costs – What are the costs compared to providing the service in-house? Are there
significant cost savings?

•

Employee salaries and benefits – What type of employee costs are estimated by using a
transit contract provider as compared to a Tribal government employee?

3. Operate in collaboration with either the Needles Area Transit System or Bullhead Area
Transit System – Bullhead Area Transit has been in operation since 2000. It is managed by the
City of Bullhead City, Human Services Department, Transit Division. The Needles Area Transit
System is currently operated by McDonald Transit Associates, Inc. Their contract expires in
summer of 2014. Collaborative opportunities to partner with Bullhead City or Needles City to
operate the service and maintain transit vehicles should be explored. This could benefit all
parties involved, including Needles, Bullhead City, and the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe.

Recommendations

30

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

4. FUNDING OPTIONS
This chapter provides an overview of funding opportunities for public transit.

4.1 Public Transportation on Indian Reservation Program
5311(c)
Program Overview – MAP-21 authorizes the Public Transportation on Indian Reservations Program
(Tribal Transit Program (TTP)) for Fiscal Years (FY) 2013-2014. The Tribal Transit Program continues to
be a set-aside from the Formula Grants for Rural Areas program but now consists of $25 million in
formula funds and $5 million in discretionary funds (for FY 2013 and FY 2014).
Eligible Recipients – Only Federally recognized tribes are eligible recipients under the Tribal Transit
Program. Sub recipients can include State or local government authorities, nonprofit organizations,
and operators of public transportation or intercity bus service that receive funds indirectly through a
recipient.
Eligible Activities – Planning, capital, operating, job access and reverse commute projects, and the
acquisition of public transportation services.
Funding Availability – Funds are available the year appropriated plus two years (total of three years).
Allocation of Funding – The Tribal Transit Program is funded under the Section 5311 program. Funds
are made available through formula allocations, as well as annually through a competitive selection
process. Formula grants for rural areas:

•
•
•

$5 million discretionary tribal program.
$25 million tribal formula program for tribes providing public transportation.
Formula factors include vehicle revenue miles and number of low-income individuals residing
on tribal lands.

Match – A 10% local match is required under the discretionary program; however, no local match is
required under the formula program.
New features of the program:

•

Low-income populations in rural areas now incorporated as a formula factor, similar to the
repealed Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) program.

•
•

Planning is now an eligible activity.

•

Administration, planning, and technical assistance set aside for states reduced to 10% (from
15%).

•

Cost of unsubsidized portion of privately provided intercity bus service that connects feeder
service is now eligible as in-kind local match.

The Tribal program provides $25 million in formula funds and $5 million for discretionary
awards.

Recommendations

31

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

•

Certain expenditures by vanpool operators may be used as local match.

4.2 Other Federal Funding Programs
Other federal funding programs that may be applicable to transit system development are summarized
in Table 12. This table lists:

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Program Name
Agency
Funding Available
Who Can Apply
Description (potential applicability to transit is highlighted here).
Uses
Links
Deadlines
Opportunity Category

This information was developed from a larger table of grant programs available through the website
Reconnecting America, http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/

4.3 Other Potential Funding Sources
Other funding sources typically used by transit systems include:


Local government funding



Advertising revenues from ads on the buses



Subsidies from colleges or specific areas or developments to support or encourage transit
service to those areas

Recommendations

32

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Table 12 – Federal Grant Programs for Transit-Related Activities
PROGRAM

AGENCY

FUNDING
AVAILABLE

WHO CAN APPLY?

DESCRIPTION

USES

LINKS

DEADLINES

OPPORTUNITY
CATEGORY

US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)
Community
Facilities Grants

USDA

$2 billion
requested
for FY13

Grants are available
to public entities
such as
municipalities,
counties, and specialpurpose districts, as
well as non-profit
corporations and
tribal governments.

Community Programs provides grants to assist in the development
of essential community facilities in rural areas and towns of up to
20,000 in population. Grant funds may be used to assist in the
development of essential community facilities. Grant funds can be
used to construct, enlarge, or improve community facilities for
health care, public safety, and community and public services.

Development Financing,
Construction

http://www.rurdev.usda
.gov/HADCF_Grants.html

Check website for
application
procedure

Discretionary

Rural Business
Enterprise
Grant Program

USDA

Generally
grants range
$10,000 up
to $500,000.
($30 million
requested
for FY13)

Rural public entities
(towns, communities,
State agencies, and
authorities), Indian
tribes and rural
private non-profit
corporations are
eligible to apply for
funding.

The RBEG program provides grants for rural projects that finance
and facilitate development of small and emerging rural businesses
help fund distance learning networks, and help fund employment
related adult education programs. Examples of eligible fund use
include: Acquisition or development of land, easements, or rights of
way; construction, renovation, of buildings, access streets and
roads, parking areas, utilities; pollution control and abatement;
capitalization of revolving loan funds including funds that will make
loans for startups and working capital; training and technical
assistance; distance adult learning for job training and
advancement; rural transportation improvement; and project
planning.

Acquisition,
Construction, Technical
Assistance

http://www.rurdev.usda
.gov/BCP_rbeg.html

Check website for
next Notice of
Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT)
Bus Livability
Initiative

DOT (FTA)

$125 million

Transit agencies or
other public
transportation
providers, States and
Indian Tribes.

Provide funding to transit agencies to replace, rehabilitate, and
purchase buses and related equipment, as well as construct or
rehabilitate bus facilities.

Capital Infrastructure
Investments

http://fta.dot.gov/fundi
ng/grants/grants_financi
ng_3557.html

Check website for
next Notice of
Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

Discretionary
Bus and Bus
Facilities
(Section 5309):
State of Good
Repair Initiative

DOT (FTA)
(MAP-21: Bus
and Bus
Facilities)

$650 million

Transit agencies or
other public
transportation
providers, States or
Indian Tribes.

Provide funding to rehabilitate bus and bus facilities. FTA will
prioritize the replacement and rehabilitation of intermodal facilities
that support the connection of bus service with multiple modes of
transportation, including but not limited to: rail, ferry, intercity bus
and private transportation providers. To be eligible, intermodal
facilities must have adjacent connectivity with bus service.

Capital Infrastructure
Investments

http://fta.dot.gov/fundi
ng/grants/grants_financi
ng_3557.html

Check website for
next Notice of
Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

Source: http://reconnectingamerica.org/resource-center/federal-grant-opportunities/
Updated by Reconnecting America, October 2013
Recommendations

33

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Table 9 – Federal Grant Programs for Transit-Related Activities, Continued
PROGRAM

AGENCY

FUNDING
AVAILABLE

WHO CAN APPLY?

DESCRIPTION

USES

Innovative
Transit
Workforce
Development
Program

DOT (FTA)

$5 million

Eligible applicants are
public transit
agencies; state
departments of
transportation
(DOTs) providing
public transportation
services; and Indian
tribes, non-profit
institutions and
institutions of higher
education.

FTA seeks proposals that promote diverse and innovative successful
workforce development models and programs. Focus will be placed
on programs that leverage investments in public transit that
impacts local employment, support blue-collar operations and
maintenance particularly in the area of new and emerging
technologies, and support innovative methods of encouraging
youth to pursue career in public transportation.

Faculty/instructors,
including salaries and
fringe benefits, support
staff, classroom space,
books, materials and
supplies, transportation
stipends for students.
Capital expenses such as
equipment purchases
are not considered to be
eligible costs unless they
directly relate to the
workforce development
program being
supported by FTA funds.

Public Lands
Highways

DOT (FHWA)

$98.5 million

State DOTs, Federal
Land Management
Agencies, State
government
agencies,
metropolitan
planning
organizations, local
governments, and
tribal governments –
must apply through
DOTs

Livability is a criteria that will be considered in the selection of
projects. Transportation planning, research, and engineering and
construction of, highways, roads, parkways, and transit facilities
that are within, adjacent to, or provide access to Indian
reservations and Federal public lands, including national parks,
refuges, forests, recreation areas, and grasslands.

Capital Infrastructure
Investments

Transportation,
Community &
System
Preservation

DOT (FHWA)

$61 million

States, metropolitan
planning
organizations, local
governments, and
tribal governments

Livability is a criterion that will be used to evaluate candidate
projects. Planning grants, implementation grants, and research,
could include transit projects, complete streets, streetscaping,
ped/bike improvements or plans, implementation of transitoriented development plans, traffic calming measures, and much
more. Very flexible program – projects must improve relationships
among transportation, community, and system preservation plans
and practices.

Planning/Research/Capi
tal Infrastructure
Investments

Source: http://reconnectingamerica.org/resource-center/federal-grant-opportunities/
Updated by Reconnecting America, October 2013

Recommendations

34

LINKS

DEADLINES

OPPORTUNITY
CATEGORY

Check website
for next Notice
of Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

http://www.fhwa.dot.g
ov/discretionary/plhd20
11info.htm

Check website
for next Notice
of Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

http://www.fhwa.dot.g
ov/discretionary/tcsp20
11info.htm

Check website
for next Notice
of Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

https://www.federalregi
ster.gov/articles/2012/0
5/31/201213220/innovativetransit-workforcedevelopmentprogram?utm_campaign
=subscription+mailing+li
st&utm_medium=email
&utm_source=federalre
gister.gov#p-3

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Table 9 – Federal Grant Programs for Transit-Related Activities, Continued
PROGRAM

AGENCY

FUNDING
AVAILABLE

WHO CAN APPLY?

DESCRIPTION

USES

LINKS

DEADLINES

OPPORTUNITY
CATEGORY

Transit
Investment in
Greenhouse Gas
and Energy
Reduction
(TIGGER)

DOT (FTA)

$49.9 million

Transit agencies or
state DOTs

Provides funding for (1) capital investments that assist in reducing
the energy consumption of a transit system and (2) capital
investments that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions of a public
transportation system.

Capital Infrastructure
Investments

http://fta.dot.gov/tigger

Check website
for next Notice
of Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

Transportation
Planning
Capacity
Building
Program (TPCB)

DOT
(FHWA/FTA)

State, metropolitan,
rural and small
communities, tribal
and public lands
planning
opportunities are
available.

Provides training, technical assistance, and support to help decision
makers, transportation officials, and staff resolve complex
transportation needs in their communities. Resources available on
topics including land use, scenario planning, TOD, non-motorized
transportation, safety, community impact assessments, operations
and management strategies, and analysis methods.

Planning/research

http://www.planning.do
t.gov/

Check website
for next Notice
of Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary and
Formula

Veterans
Transportation
and Community
Living Initiative
Grant Program

DOT (FTA) (in
partnership
with HHS and
Department
of Veterans
Affairs, Labor
and Defense)

Eligible applicants are
existing Direct
Recipients under
FTA's Section 5307
Urbanized Area
Formula program, as
well as local
governments, States,
and Indian Tribes.

The Veterans Transportation and Community Living Initiative
(VTCLI) is an innovative, federally coordinated partnership that will
make it easier for U.S. veterans, active service members, military
families, and others to learn about and arrange for locally
available transportation services that connect them with work,
education, health care, and other vital services in their
communities. Projects are being funded in urban, suburban, and
rural communities around the nation to strengthen and promote
"one-call" information centers and other tools.

Capital and research
grants

http://www.fta.dot.gov/
grants/13094_13528.ht
ml

Check website
for next Notice
of Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

Local governments

Annual, competitive solicitation open to state, local, regional, and
tribal governments (and non-profits that have partnered with a
governmental entity) that want to incorporate smart growth
techniques into their future development.

Technical Assistance

http://www.epa.gov/dc
ed/sgia.htm

Check website
for next Notice
of Funding
Availability
(NOFA)
Announcement.

Discretionary

$25 million
in capital
funding; $5
million in
research
funding

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
Smart Growth
Technical
Assistance
grants

EPA

Various

Source: http://reconnectingamerica.org/resource-center/federal-grant-opportunities/
Updated by Reconnecting America, October 2013

Recommendations

35

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

APPENDIX A – TRIBAL TRANSIT PEER SYSTEM
INTERVIEWS

Recommendations

36

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Tribal Transit Operator Interview
Transit System: Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Tribe Transit System
Operator: Franklin Kauakahi, Transit Manager
Interview: 1/14/2014
Operations
1. What were your main implementation challenges in starting your transit system? What were the
lessons learned? Were there any major challenges? Conversely, were there any opportunities that
weren’t identified beforehand?
The transit system has been in operation for about 15 years, and staff has changed over time,
so there is not historical information available
2. What vehicle type and size did you use when starting your transit system? How did you decide on
the make, model, and size of vehicle?
Initially, some of their fleet was larger, 20-passenger Eldorado buses. They were built on Ford
Chassis and cost between $50,000 to $60,000. They felt these were too big, however. Now their
transit system uses 15-passenger Ford vans (E-350). These vans will be ending production by
Ford, however.
Currently they have:
4 – 15 passenger vans
3 – 15 passenger, handicapped equipped vans
1 – 15 passenger cutaway vans with 2 stations for wheelchairs
He said that they have purchased vans through 5311 grants and through purchase using tribal
funds only. In one case they “piggybacked” with Valley Metro to purchase a bus.
3. How is the transit system funded? Were there cost sharing opportunities? How much Tribal funding
is used for the transit system on an annual basis?
The system is funded through a 5311 grant and the remainder through tribal funding.
4. Was management of the system contracted out or performed in-house?
In-house
5. Similarly for maintenance, was it contracted out or performed in-house?
In-house - the Tribe has a fleet of 650 vehicles, so although one mechanic is assigned for
transit, there are other mechanics available to work on the buses if needed. They have their
own fueling pumps.
6. What were your initial operating costs and ridership? How have they evolved?
No information available on this.
7. What fares do you charge?
Their fares are very cheap - $0.75 per ride and $0.85 to go to Scottsdale. Seniors have reduced
fares. The fares have not increased in ten years.

Administration
Recommendations

37

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

1. What is your staffing structure? Did you initially hire part time or full time drivers? How many staff
and drivers were hired to operate the system?
Their staff comprises:





Manager – 1 person
Dispatcher – 1 person (who also assists with administrative tasks)
Drivers – 5 full time and 1 part time staff
Mechanic – 1 person

The staff is all tribal employees.
It is important to hire a dispatcher with experience as a dispatcher, because they have to make
route accommodations to pick up demand –response requests “on the fly.” Although they
have five fixed routes, they accommodate demand response requests if the bus is not full.
2. What type and hours of training do drivers and administrative staffs go through before starting to
work?
They have on the job training, as well as training for First Aid, Passenger sensitivity training,
and CPR. They use training through the RTAP Program through ADOT.
Some of the drivers do not have Commercial Driver Licenses. If they vehicle is under 16
passengers and does not have air brakes, they are not required to have that type of license.
3. What data do you track?
They have software programs to track fuel, bus warranty and maintenance information,
ADOT monthly reports, number of deadhead miles, productivity, operating costs, and repairs
Ridership and Marketing
1. How do you advertise / market the transit system? When the system first started, how was it
announced and advertised?
They do not advertise – they hand out pamphlets or have information in the tribal newspaper.
They are happy with the ridership now – it is at “critical mass” and they do not want to
expand the number of vehicles or routes right now.
2. If you raised or lowered fares since the system started, how has ridership responded?
The fares have been the same for the last ten years.

Recommendations

38

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Tribal Transit Operator Interview
Transit System: Navajo Transit System
Operator: Lee Bigwater, Transit Manager
Interview: 1/14/2014
Operations
1. What were your main implementation challenges in starting your transit system? What were the
lessons learned? Were there any major challenges? Conversely, were there any opportunities that
weren’t identified beforehand?
They have reporting requirements for three states: Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Their
ridership mainly serves employees, medical services, some education (very few students), and
general public, including elders.
Suggestions for development of a new transit system were:





Use the Section 5311 application that is on the ADOT website to help develop the
plan of operations. Answering every question in the application form can help
assure your operations plan is complete.
There is a Transit Cost Allocation Workshop held in Phoenix and Flagstaff for
new 5311applicants.
Develop a route plan first and compute ridership projections based on the route
plan.
Identify activity centers such as schools, social services, shopping, health centers,
and locations where a majority of persons live to locate routes.

2. What vehicle type and size did you use when starting your transit system? How did you decide on
the make, model, and size of vehicle?
They use 49 passenger motor coaches.
3. How is the transit system funded? Were there cost sharing opportunities? How much Tribal
funding is used for the transit system on an annual basis?
Navajo Transit System receives Administration, Operating and Capital funding under the
Section 5311 Rural Public Transportation Program from Arizona, New Mexico and Utah
Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the Navajo Nation.
Capital costs are matched on an 80/20 basis.
Operating costs are matched with federal grants on a 50/50 basis.
4. Was management of the system contracted out or performed in-house?
In-house
5. Similarly for maintenance, was it contracted out or performed in-house?
In-house
6. What were your initial operating costs and ridership? How have they evolved?
No information available on this.

Recommendations

39

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

7. What fares do you charge?
The fares are very reasonable- $2.00 to ride all day.

Administration
1. What is your staffing structure? Did you initially hire part time or full time drivers? How many staff
and drivers were hired to operate the system?
Their staff comprises:
 Drivers – 35
 Administrative staff – 15 persons
2. What type and hours of training do drivers and administrative staffs go through before starting to
work?
No response.
3. What data do you track?
Navajo Transit System needs to satisfy reporting requirements for three states.
Ridership and Marketing
3. How do you advertise / market the transit system? When the system first started, how was it
announced and advertised?
There is a website for the transit system, http://www.navajotransit.com/
4. If you raised or lowered fares since the system started, how has ridership responded?
On November 1, 2012 the fare was increased to $2.00 per person.

Recommendations

40

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

APPENDIX B – POTENTIAL TRANSIT STOP
LOCATIONS
Identification of potential transit stop locations is for route planning purposes
only. The final locations of stops will be determined during implementation
planning.

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 1 – Merriman Rd / Goodman Rd – near side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

O Street

Stop ID 2 – O Street at Needles Highway/River Road – near side stop

Needles Hwy / River Road

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 3 – River Rd / M Street – near side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 4 –River Road / K Street – near side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 5 – Plantation Road at Sands Road – near side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 6 – Plantation Road/ Mint Rd – near side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 7 – Plantation Rd / Peck Rd – near side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 8 – Plantation Rd west of Scott Circle – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 9 – Plantation Rd / Alexander Lane – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 10 – Plantation Rd / Sands Rd

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 11 – SR 95 /Willow Dr. – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 12 – SR 95 / Lipan Blvd. – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 13 – Valley View Medical Center (both an inbound and outbound stop)

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 14- SR 95 /Aztec Rd (Smith’s Grocery) – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 15 – SR 95 / Courtney Rd – near side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop 16 – SR 95 / Lipan Blvd – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 17 – SR 95 / Willow Dr – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 18 – River Rd / SR 95 – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop 19 – River Rd /M Street – near side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 20 – O St / Needles Highway (River Rd) – far side stop

Recommendations

Fort Mojave Indian Reservation Transit Study

Stop ID 21- Merriman Street / Goodman Rd (O St) – far side stop

Recommendations