DOCSLIB.ORG

Tri-County Public Transportation Improvement Plan Fy2021-Fy2023

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tri-County Public Transportation Improvement Plan Fy2021-Fy2023 TRI-COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN FY2021-FY2023 Investing the Keep Oregon Moving Act with Recommended Services and Facilities to Better Serve Low-Income Communities within the Tri-County Region NOVEMBER 2020 TRI-COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN Tri-County Public Transportation Improvement Plan November 2020 Table of Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ 1 2. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 STIF Legislation .................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 STIF Rules Regarding the Plan ............................................................................................................. 5 2.3 HB 2017 Transit Advisory Committee .................................................................................................. 8 2.4 Projected STIF Funding ........................................................................................................................ 9 3. EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES ........................................................................................................... 11 3.1 Regional and Local Transit Service Providers .................................................................................... 11 3.2 Community-Based and Long-Distance Transit Service Providers....................................................... 18 3.3 Ride Connection ................................................................................................................................. 18 4. DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................................... 21 4.1 STIF Definition of Poverty .................................................................................................................. 21 4.2 Demographic Indicators of Low-Income Communities ...................................................................... 21 5 TRIMET DISTRICT ................................................................................................................................................ 23 5.1 Needs Assessment ............................................................................................................................. 23 5.2 Proposed Funding Level ..................................................................................................................... 30 5.3 Proposed Service and Capital Improvements .................................................................................... 30 6 CLACKAMAS COUNTY ........................................................................................................................................... 35 6.1 Projected Funding .............................................................................................................................. 35 6.2 Needs Assessment ............................................................................................................................. 35 6.3 Proposed Service Improvements........................................................................................................ 36 6.4 Proposed Capital Improvements ....................................................................................................... 42 7 MULTNOMAH COUNTY ......................................................................................................................................... 43 7.1 Projected Funding .............................................................................................................................. 43 7.2 Needs Assessment ............................................................................................................................. 43 7.3 Proposed Capital Improvements ....................................................................................................... 46 7.4 Proposed Regional Coordination Project Funds................................................................................. 46 8 WASHINGTON COUNTY ........................................................................................................................................ 47 8.1 Supporting Plans ................................................................................................................................ 47 8.2 Needs Assessment ............................................................................................................................. 47 8.3 Proposed Service Improvements........................................................................................................ 50 8.4 Projected HB 2017 Funding and Budget ............................................................................................ 52 9 REGIONAL COORDINATION PROGRAM AND PLAN ....................................................................................................... 55 9.1 RCP Subcommittee ............................................................................................................................ 55 9.2 RCP Project Selection Process & Criteria ............................................................................................ 56 9.3 Selected Projects ................................................................................................................................ 57 9.4 2020 PTIP Update to RCP Program .................................................................................................... 57 10 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................................... 58 Page i November 2020 Tri-County Public Transportation Improvement Plan List of Tables TABLE 1: HB 2017 REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR TRI-COUNTY REGION SUB-RECIPIENTS: FY2021 – FY2023 ...................................... 10 TABLE 2: PROJECTED HB 2017 FUNDING – CLACKAMAS COUNTY ............................................................................................. 35 TABLE 3: CLACKAMAS COUNTY SERVICE ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS ............................................................................................ 37 TABLE 4: PROJECTED HB 2017 FUNDING – MULTNOMAH COUNTY ........................................................................................... 43 TABLE 5: SUMMARY OF 2-YEAR, RURAL MULTNOMAH COUNTY TRANSIT BUDGET PROPOSAL (ONLY HB 2017 FUNDS) ....................... 46 TABLE 6: WASHINGTON COUNTY AVERAGE COMPARATIVE STATISTICS ....................................................................................... 48 TABLE 7: PTIP PROJECT LIST – WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSIT SERVICE ENHANCEMENTS ............................................................. 51 TABLE 8: PTIP PROJECT LIST – INVESTMENT CATEGORY AND PRIORITY CRITERIA .......................................................................... 52 TABLE 9: PROJECTED HB 2017 FUNDING – WASHINGTON COUNTY .......................................................................................... 52 TABLE 10: SUMMARY OF 2-YEAR, WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSIT BUDGET PROPOSAL (ONLY HB 2017 FUNDS) .............................. 53 TABLE 11: RECOMMENDED RCP PROJECTS ........................................................................................................................... 57 List of Figures FIGURE 1: TRI-COUNTY REGION PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICE PROVIDERS ........................................................................... 12 FIGURE 2: EMPLOYER AND SELF-EMPLOYED PAYROLL TAX TRIMET SERVICE DISTRICT ................................................................... 13 FIGURE 3: DIVERSITY AND TRANSIT EQUITY INDEX ................................................................................................................... 22 FIGURE 4: TRIMET BUS AND MAX RIDERSHIP HISTORY ........................................................................................................... 23 FIGURE 5: COMPARING HOME VALUE INCREASES AND TRANSIT RIDERSHIP LOSS WITHIN THE TRIMET SERVICE DISTRICT ..................... 24 FIGURE 6: CHANGE IN TRIMET RIDERSHIP- 2001 TO 2016 ...................................................................................................... 24 FIGURE 7: CITY OF PORTLAND ROSE LANE VISION ................................................................................................................... 28 FIGURE 8: HB 2017 FUNDING ALLOCATION, FY 2021 - FY 2023 ............................................................................................ 30 FIGURE 9: PTIP SERVICE PLAN ............................................................................................................................................ 32 FIGURE 10: REGIONAL COORDINATION PROGRAM SCHEDULE ................................................................................................... 56 Attachments ATTACHMENT A: HB 2017 ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND REGIONAL COORDINATION PROGRAM COMMITTEE ..................................... 61 ATTACHMENT B: TRIMET LOW-INCOME FARE PROGRAM ............................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. ATTACHMENT C: DIVERSITY AND TRANSIT EQUITY INDEX MEASURES AND DATA SOURCES .............................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Existing Framework Memo Draft 11
    To: Gorge Transit Strategy Working Group Date: November 15, 2020 From: Kathy Fitzpatrick, Mobility Manager Subject: Gorge Regional Transit Strategy: Existing Framework Memo Gorge Regional Transit Strategy: Background The purpose of the Gorge Regional Transit Strategy phase 1 is to combine the goals, policies, and prioritizations of local transportation planning efforts in the Columbia Gorge to establish a foundation for a regional strategy and vision for public transportation. Phase 1 objectives include strengthening partnerships, completing local plan assessments, and synthesizing goals and policies into a high-level regional vision. Phase II of the Strategy will focus on an implementation strategy with additional data analysis, ridership forecasts, financial planning, and operational assessments. The USFS (Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area) offered assistance from the US DOT Volpe Center for the Gorge Transit Strategy. The Gorge Regional Transit Strategy Project Management Team worked with the Volpe Center Team to build on their recent transportation plan research work. Existing Framework Memo The Existing Framework Memo summarizes and synthesizes existing local, regional, statewide public transportation plans, studies, and programs to identify common or conflicting goals, policies and strategies. This will create an awareness of inconsistencies and endorsement of commonalities but does not seek to amend or revise current or adopted plans. The Existing Framework Memo includes an overview of the planning area, a summary of existing services, and summaries of the existing local, regional, and statewide public transportation plans reviewed. Strategy Area The strategy area is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the five transportation providers whose partnership forms the Gorge TransLink Alliance. Providers include Mt Adams Transportation Service (Klickitat County), Skamania County Transit, Columbia Area Transit (Hood River County), the Link (Wasco County), and Sherman County Community Transit.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Policy Advisory Committee On
    Date: December 1, 2020 To: Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) and interested parties From: Carrie MacLaren, Metro Attorney Michelle Bellia, Senior Attorney Margi Bradway, Planning & Development Deputy Director CC: Councilor Shirley Craddick, JPACT Chair Subject: JPACT Member and Alternate Appointment Process Purpose To provide guidance to cities and counties in the Portland Metro area about appointments to the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) based on the JPACT bylaws, written and adopted by JPACT and the Metro Council in 1990 and amended in 2008. Background Metro is the federally mandated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) designated by the governor to develop an overall transportation plan and to program federal funds. Comprised of transportation representatives from across the region, JPACT recommends priorities and develops plans for the region. Before adopting transportation policies, the Metro Council must consider JPACT’s recommendations. Federal law, MAP-21, requires that MPOs representing areas with populations over 200,000 (known as Transportation Management Areas, or TMAs) have a decision-making structure that incorporates input from local elected officials, transit agencies, and appropriate state officials. Across the country, MPO boards vary in size. Federal regulations further define the role of the “policy advisory committee” in terms provide oversight and guidance to the MPO on transportation planning and funding. Metro’s Code and the JPACT Bylaws describe the makeup
    [Show full text]
  • City of Wilsonville Transit Master Plan
    City of Wilsonville Transit Master Plan CONVENIENCE SAFETY RELIABILITY EFFICIENCY FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY FRIENDLY SERVICE EQUITY & ACCESS ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY JUNE 2017 Acknowledgements The City of Wilsonville would like to acknowledge the following for their dedication to the development of this Transit Master Plan. Their insight and outlook toward the future of this City helped create a comprehensive plan that represents the needs of employers, residents and visitors of Wilsonville. Transit Master Plan Task Force Planning Commission Julie Fitzgerald, Chair* Jerry Greenfield, Chair Kristin Akervall Eric Postma, Vice Chair Caroline Berry Al Levit Paul Diller Phyllis Millan Lynnda Hale Peter Hurley Barb Leisy Simon Springall Peter Rapley Kamran Mesbah Pat Rehberg Jean Tsokos City Staff Stephanie Yager Dwight Brashear, Transit Director Eric Loomis, Operations Manager City Council Scott Simonton, Fleet Manager Tim Knapp, Mayor Gregg Johansen, Transit Field Supervisor Scott Star, President Patrick Edwards, Transit Field Supervisor Kristin Akervall Nicole Hendrix, Transit Management Analyst Charlotte Lehan Michelle Marston, Transit Program Coordinator Susie Stevens Brad Dillingham, Transit Planning Intern Julie Fitzgerald* Chris Neamtzu, Planning Director Charlie Tso, Assistant Planner Consultants Susan Cole, Finance Director Jarrett Walker Keith Katko, Finance Operations Manager Michelle Poyourow Tami Bergeron, Planning Administration Assistant Christian L Watchie Amanda Guile-Hinman, Assistant City Attorney Ellen Teninty Stephan Lashbrook,
    [Show full text]
  • Please Be Kind to One Another
    SERVING ORGANIZED LABOR IN OREGON AND SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON SINCE 1900 INSIDE OUTSIDE PAGES NORTHWEST HE TOFFICIAL PUBLICBATION UOF LLETIN LABOR Amalgamated Transit Union PRESS Local 757 VOLUME 121, NUMBER 23 PORTLAND, OREGON DECEMBER 4, 2020 President’s Vice President’s Report Roundup Please be kind to one another By Shirley Block By Jonathan Hunt out and getting into trouble when they normally Season’s greetings Sisters and Brothers, wouldn’t. I would like to encourage you to check in with Hello, Brothers and Sisters, I hope you are all able to have your fellow sisters and brothers! First, I want to say I hope everyone had a happy and safe Thanks - a safe holiday with your family. At this point in time it doesn’t appear we’re go - giving. I know this year has been hard on everyone and very dif - With so many things chang - ing to have regular Union Meetings for a while. ferent. I know that none of us thought we would still be dealing ing all around us, we need to However, we are having monthly check-ins and with this virus. And I know that it hits harder when it starts affecting give each other space. We need small Zoom discussions. Please reach out to me the holidays. Most folks that I know stayed home with the family to practice social distancing, but if your work group would like to have a Zoom they live with and relied on Zoom and phone calls to reach out to we also need to be kind to one meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Canby Transit Choices Report DECEMBER 14, 2016
    Canby Transit Choices Report DECEMBER 14, 2016 For Canby Area Transit Table of Contents Summary . 4 Productivity . 28 Introduction Current Costs and Revenues . 29 The Variety of Transit Services in Canby . 6 Near Future . 30 Fixed-Route Transit . 6 Highway 99 corridor study . 30 Demand Responsive Transit . 8 Federal transit funding . 30 What causes transit ridership? . 10 Increasing hourly costs . 30 Transit’s conflicting goals . 12 Existing Ridership and Performance Choices for Canby . 13 Route 99 . 32 Market and Needs Assessment Dial-a-ride and ADA paratransit . 33 Density of Residents and Jobs . .15 . Operations Contract . 38 Low-Income Residents . .15 . Service Standards . 38 Younger and Older Residents . 15. Language . 39 Residents by Race/Ethnicity . 15 . Weekends . 39 Commuting Patterns . 23 Complexity . .41 History and Trends Future Alternatives Recent History . 25 Focus on Key Choices . 43 Amount of service provided . 26 Dial-a-ride and ADA Paratransit Efficiency . 43 Ridership . 27 Alternative 1: Local Fixed Route . 45 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Table of Contents Local circulator . 45 Dial-a-ride and ADA paratransit . 46 Route 99 . 46 Alternative 2: More Route 99 Service . 47 Route 99 . 47 Dial-a-ride and ADA paratransit . 47 Weekend Service . 52 Measuring Impacts to Key Populations . 52 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Canby’s answer to the first question were Following the release of this report, CAT Summary “Yes, we should slightly shift our invest- staff and consultants will be attending This report is the first step in the develop- ment toward fixed routes.” These two meetings, making presentations, distribut- ment of a new Transit Master Plan for the Alternatives show how much service of ing surveys, and taking input in other ways, City of Canby .
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Active Transportation in the Western United States: an Alternative Future for Cache Valley, Utah
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 8-2018 Planning for Active Transportation in the Western United States: An Alternative Future for Cache Valley, Utah Stephanie A. Tomlin Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Environmental Design Commons, and the Landscape Architecture Commons Recommended Citation Tomlin, Stephanie A., "Planning for Active Transportation in the Western United States: An Alternative Future for Cache Valley, Utah" (2018). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 7195. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/7195 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PLANNING FOR ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION IN THE WESTERN UNITED STATES: AN ALTERNATIVE FUTURE FOR CACHE VALLEY, UTAH by Stephanie A. Tomlin A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Bioregional Planning Approved: Bartlett Warren-Kretzschmar, Ph.D. Richard Toth, M.L.A. Major Professor Committee Member Jordy Guth, M.S. Mark R. McLellan, Ph.D. Committee Member Vice President for Research and Dean of the School of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2018 ii Copyright © Stephanie A. Tomlin, 2018 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Planning for Active Transportation in the Western United States: An Alternative Future for Cache Valley, Utah by Stephanie A. Tomlin, Master of Bioregional Planning Utah State University, 2018 Major Professor: Bartlett (Barty) Warren-Kretzschmar, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Applicant Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties
    FY19-FY21 Regional Coordination Program STIF FUNDING APPLICATION I. Applicant Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties and government operated transit providers are eligible to receive RCP funds and are therefore Grant Recipients. Other local government authorities, non-profit organizations, and private for-profit organizations are not directly eligible. However, such entities may be a Co-Applicant in an application. 1. Grant Recipient Name of Grant Recipient: Clackamas County Contact Person: Teresa Christopherson Address: 2051 Kaen Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045 Telephone: 503-650-5718 E-Mail: [email protected] 2. Type of Grant Recipient (check one) Clackamas County X Multnomah County Washington County Government Operated Transit Provider 3. Co-Applicant (if different than Grant Recipient) Name of Co-Applicant: Contact Person: Address: Telephone: E-Mail: Regional Coordination Program Page 1 Regional Coordination Program FY19-21 Application II. Project Details RCP eligible projects must appear in a Local Plan (see STIF Rules OARs 732-042-0015) and intend to improve or expand public transportation or maintain public transportation. 1. Project Details Project Title: Tualatin/West Linn/Oregon City Commuter Shuttle Start Date: January 1, 2019 End Date: Ongoing (application to 6/30/21) 2. Project Purpose (check one) Improve or Expand Public Transportation: X Maintain Public Transportation: 3. Local Plan Plan Name: TriMet Southwest Service Enhancement Plan Governing Body That TriMet Board of Directors Adopted Plan: Plan Adoption Date: December, 2015 Plan Web Address: https://trimet.org/future/ Plan Page Number P. 9, 13 Referencing Project: III. Funding Eligible use of STIF funds for the RCP may include planning, capital, and ongoing operations within the TriMet District.
    [Show full text]
  • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Adopted April 8Th, 2014 by Ordinance No
    CITY OF TROUTDALE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Adopted April 8th, 2014 by Ordinance no. 820 Prepared for: Prepared by: City of Troutdale Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 219 E Historic Columbia River Highway 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Troutdale, Oregon 97060 Portland, Oregon 97205 503.665.5175 503.228.5230 www.kittelson.com Transportation System Plan Troutdale Transportation System Plan Troutdale, Oregon Prepared For: City of Troutdale 219 E Historic Columbia River Highway Troutdale, Oregon 97060 (503) 665-5175 Prepared By: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205 (503) 228-5230 Project Manager: Matt Hughart, AICP Project Principal: Mark Vandehey, P.E. Project No. 12560.0 March 2014 Table of Contents Transportation System Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1-1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 Goals and Policies ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1-2 Transportation Plans ................................................................................................................................................................ 1-3 Financing ...............................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Yamhill County Transit Area Transit Development Plan
    Transit Development Plan | Memo #2: Existing Conditions Yamhill County Transit Area T Image: Doug Kerr Yamhill County TransitF Area Transit DevelopmentA Plan Memo #2: ExistingR Conditions – Appendices DRAFT D September 2017 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i T APPENDIX A Route Profile Charts andF Tables A R D Transit Development Plan | Memo #2: Existing Conditions – Appendix A Yamhill County Transit Area Table of Contents Page APPENDIX A Route Profile Charts and Tables ........................................................................... i Route 2 ..................................................................................................................................................... A-1 Route 3 ..................................................................................................................................................... A-4 Route 5 ..................................................................................................................................................... A-7 Route 7 ..................................................................................................................................................... A-9 Route 11 ................................................................................................................................................ A-11 Route 22 ................................................................................................................................................ A-14 Route 24S .............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WSK Commuter Rail Study
    Oregon Department of Transportation – Rail Division Oregon Rail Study Appendix I Wilsonville to Salem Commuter Rail Assessment Prepared by: Parsons Brinckerhoff Team Parsons Brinckerhoff Simpson Consulting Sorin Garber Consulting Group Tangent Services Wilbur Smith and Associates April 2010 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 3 WHAT IS COMMUTER RAIL? ................................................................................................... 3 GLOSSARY OF TERMS............................................................................................................ 3 STUDY AREA....................................................................................................................... 4 WES COMMUTER RAIL.......................................................................................................... 6 OTHER PASSENGER RAIL SERVICES IN THE CORRIDOR .................................................................. 6 OUTREACH WITH RAILROADS: PNWR AND BNSF .................................................................. 7 PORTLAND & WESTERN RAILROAD........................................................................................... 7 BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY ..................................................................................................... 7 ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Location Database Technical Documentation and User Guide
    SMART LOCATION DATABASE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION AND USER GUIDE Version 3.0 Updated: June 2021 Authors: Jim Chapman, MSCE, Managing Principal, Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. (UD4H) Eric H. Fox, MScP, Senior Planner, UD4H William Bachman, Ph.D., Senior Analyst, UD4H Lawrence D. Frank, Ph.D., President, UD4H John Thomas, Ph.D., U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization Alexis Rourk Reyes, MSCRP, U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization About This Report The Smart Location Database is a publicly available data product and service provided by the U.S. EPA Smart Growth Program. This version 3.0 documentation builds on, and updates where needed, the version 2.0 document.1 Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. updated this guide for the project called Updating the EPA GSA Smart Location Database. Acknowledgements Urban Design 4 Health was contracted by the U.S. EPA with support from the General Services Administration’s Center for Urban Development to update the Smart Location Database and this User Guide. As the Project Manager for this study, Jim Chapman supervised the data development and authored this updated user guide. Mr. Eric Fox and Dr. William Bachman led all data acquisition, geoprocessing, and spatial analyses undertaken in the development of version 3.0 of the Smart Location Database and co- authored the user guide through substantive contributions to the methods and information provided. Dr. Larry Frank provided data development input and reviewed the report providing critical input and feedback. The authors would like to acknowledge the guidance, review, and support provided by: • Ruth Kroeger, U.S. General Services Administration • Frank Giblin, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities I Table of Contents June 2020
    Table of Contents June 2020 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1-1 Development of the CTP .......................................................................................................... 1-3 Principles of the CTP ................................................................................................................ 1-5 Overview of relevant grant programs ..................................................................................... 1-7 TriMet Role as the Special Transportation Fund Agency ........................................................ 1-8 Other State Funding ................................................................................................................. 1-9 Coordination with Metro and Joint Policy Advisory Committee (JPACT) .............................. 1-11 2. Existing Transportation Services ...................................................................... 2-1 Regional Transit Service Providers .......................................................................................... 2-6 Community-Based Transit Providers ..................................................................................... 2-18 Statewide Transit Providers ................................................................................................... 2-26 3. Service Guidelines ........................................................................................... 3-1 History .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]