DOCSLIB.ORG

APPENDIX G 2018 Regional Transportation Plan Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and People with Disabilities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
APPENDIX G 2018 Regional Transportation Plan Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and People with Disabilities APPENDIX G 2018 Regional Transportation Plan Coordinated transportation plan for seniors and people with disabilities December 6, 2018 oregonmetro.gov/rtp Metro respects civil rights Metro fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that requires that no person be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin under any program or activity for which Metro receives federal financial assistance. Metro fully complies with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act that requires that no otherwise qualified individual with a disability be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination solely by reason of their disability under any program or activity for which Metro receives federal financial assistance. If any person believes they have been discriminated against regarding the receipt of benefits or services because of race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability, they have the right to file a complaint with Metro. For information on Metro’s civil rights program, or to obtain a discrimination complaint form, visit oregonmetro.gov/civilrights or call 503-797-1536. Metro provides services or accommodations upon request to persons with disabilities and people who need an interpreter at public meetings. If you need a sign language interpreter, communication aid or language assistance, call 503-797-1700 or TDD/TTY 503-797-1804 (8 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays) 5 business days before the meeting. All Metro meetings are wheelchair accessible. For up-to-date public transportation information, visit TriMet’s website at trimet.org. Metro is the federally mandated metropolitan planning organization designated by the governor to develop an overall transportation plan and to allocate federal funds for the region. The Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) is a 17-member committee that provides a forum for elected officials and representatives of agencies involved in transportation to evaluate transportation needs in the region and to make recommendations to the Metro Council. The established decision-making process assures a well-balanced regional transportation system and involves local elected officials directly in decisions that help the Metro Council develop regional transportation policies, including allocating transportation funds. Regional Transportation Plan website: oregonmetro.gov/rtp The preparation of this strategy was financed in part by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this strategy are not necessarily those of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. 2018 Regional Transportation Plan Appendix G COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR SENIORS AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES Prepared for: TriMet Prepared by: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. MAY 27, 2016 Introduction June 24, 2016 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1-1 Development of the CTP .................................................................................. 1-3 Principles of the CTP ........................................................................................ 1-5 2. Existing Transportation Services ...................................................................... 2-1 Regional Transit Service Providers ................................................................... 2-5 Community-Based Transit Providers .............................................................. 2-17 Statewide Transit Providers ........................................................................... 2-25 3. Service Guidelines ........................................................................................... 3-1 History ............................................................................................................. 3-1 Service Guidelines ............................................................................................ 3-2 Capacity Guidelines .......................................................................................... 3-6 Performance Measures and Reporting ............................................................ 3-9 4. Needs Assessment ........................................................................................... 4-1 Demographic Analysis ...................................................................................... 4-1 Stakeholder Outreach .................................................................................... 4-17 Transportation Service Needs ........................................................................ 4-18 Infrastructure Needs ...................................................................................... 4-21 Coordination and Organizational Needs ........................................................ 4-21 Technology Needs .......................................................................................... 4-22 Deficiencies to Service Guidelines .................................................................. 4-23 5. Priorities, Strategies and Actions ..................................................................... 5-1 Priorities .......................................................................................................... 5-1 Strategies and Actions ..................................................................................... 5-2 Plan Implementation Committee ..................................................................... 5-5 Measure Performance ..................................................................................... 5-6 Enhance Access and increase System Efficiency .............................................. 5-7 Maintain and Expand Service to Meet Service Guidelines.............................. 5-17 2016 TriMet Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities i List of Figures June 24, 2016 Improve Customer Experience ....................................................................... 5-22 Transit Provider Coordination and Innovative Partnerships ........................... 5-28 6. Financial Plan ................................................................................................... 6-1 State Special Transportation Fund (STF) Program ............................................ 6-1 §5310 Funds .................................................................................................... 6-2 Other Funds ..................................................................................................... 6-2 Projected Funding Needs ................................................................................. 6-3 Current Federal Authorization ......................................................................... 6-4 Funding Process ............................................................................................... 6-7 7. Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 7-9 2016 TriMet Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities ii List of Attachments June 24, 2016 List of Figures Figure 1-1.Continuum of Transportation Options for Seniors and People with Disabilities ........................................................................................................ 1-2 Figure 4-1. Portland Metropolitan Area Transit Service Coverage Map ............... 4-3 Figure 4-2. 2014 Population Density.................................................................... 4-6 Figure 4-3. Regional Job Density .......................................................................... 4-7 Figure 4-4. Low Income and Non-English Speaking Population ........................... 4-8 Figure 4-5. Minority Population .......................................................................... 4-9 Figure 4-6. Households with Low Vehicle Access ............................................... 4-10 Figure 4-7. Location of Seniors and/or Persons with Disabilities ....................... 4-15 Figure 4-8. Affordable Housing Stock ................................................................ 4-16 2016 TriMet Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities iii List of Figures June 24, 2016 List of Attachments Attachment A: Common Acronyms Attachment B: Glossary of Terms Attachment C: STFAC Membership Roster Attachment D: STFAC Meeting Summaries Attachment E: Transit Providers Fleet Data Attachment F: Ride Connection Partner Network Attachment G: Performance Measures and Reporting Attachment H: Demographic Data Attachment I: Summary of Stakeholder Workshop Attachment J: Peer Review on Strategies Attachment K: Summary of STFAC Workshop on Priorities and Strategies Attachment L: Summary of STFAC Workshop on Funding Process and Application Criteria Attachment M: Proposed Application Funding Process Attachment N: Draft Funding Application 2016 TriMet Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities iv Introduction June 24, 2016 1. INTRODUCTION Decisions we make today on how best to invest in transportation options for seniors and persons with disabilities will affect the future quality of life for thousands of tri- county residents.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FY2020 Financial Forecast Executive Summary April 2019
    PRR 2019-519 Budget and Grants Administration Department Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon FINANCIAL FORECAST FY2020 BUDGET FORECAST WITH FINANCIAL ANALYSIS PRR 2019-519 PRR 2019-519 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Section 1 – ECONOMIC INDICATORS 5 Section 2 – LONG-TERM PROJECTIONS 11 Section 3 – FY2019 FINANCIAL FORECAST ASSUMPTIONS REPORT 15 A. Revenue Forecast Assumptions 1. Payroll Tax Revenues (Employer and Municipal) 19 2. Self-Employment Tax Revenues 21 3. State-In-Lieu of Tax Revenues 21 4. Employee Payroll Tax Revenues – Special Transportation Improvement Fund 22 5. Passenger Revenues 23 6. Ridership Forecasts 24 7. Fare Agreements and Programs 25 8. Fare Revenue Conclusions 27 9. Other Operating Revenues 27 10. Interest Earnings 28 11. Grant and Capital Project Reimbursements 29 12. Accessible Transportation Program (ATP) Funds 31 13. Funding Exchanges 31 14. Undistributed Budgetary Fund Balance 31 15. Total Revenues 32 B. System Operating Maintenance and Capital Cost Assumptions 16. Cost Inflation 33 17. Wages and Salaries 33 18. Health Plans 34 19. Workers Compensation 34 20. Pensions 35 21. Retiree Medical (Other Post-Employment Benefits [“OPEB”]) 36 22. Diesel Fuel 37 23. Electricity and Other Utilities 37 24. Other Materials and Services 38 25. Bus Operations: Existing Services 38 26. Accessible Transportation Program (ATP or “LIFT”) 38 27. Light Rail Operations: Existing Services 40 28. Commuter Rail Operations 41 29. Streetcar Operations: Existing Services 41 i PRR 2019-519 Table of Contents (continued) 30. Facilities 42 31. Security and Operations Support 42 32. Engineering & Construction Division 42 33. General & Administration 42 34. Capital Improvement Program 43 C.
    [Show full text]
  • NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon
    Portland State University PDXScholar Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Publications and Presentations Planning 6-24-2014 Do TODs Make a Difference? NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon Jenny H. Liu Portland State University, [email protected] Zakari Mumuni Portland State University Matt Berggren Portland State University Matt Miller University of Utah Arthur C. Nelson University of Utah SeeFollow next this page and for additional additional works authors at: https:/ /pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac Part of the Transportation Commons, Urban Studies Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Liu, Jenny H.; Mumuni, Zakari; Berggren, Matt; Miller, Matt; Nelson, Arthur C.; and Ewing, Reid, "Do TODs Make a Difference? NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon" (2014). Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations. 124. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/124 This Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Jenny H. Liu, Zakari Mumuni, Matt Berggren, Matt Miller, Arthur C. Nelson, and Reid Ewing This report is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/124 NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon Do TODs Make a Difference? Jenny H. Liu, Zakari Mumuni, Matt Berggren, Matt Miller, Arthur C. Nelson & Reid Ewing Portland State University 6/24/2014 ______________________________________________________________________________ DO TODs MAKE A DIFFERENCE? 1 of 35 Section 1-INTRODUCTION 2 of 35 ______________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents 1-INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Mobility Payment Integration: State-Of-The-Practice Scan
    Mobility Payment Integration: State-of-the-Practice Scan OCTOBER 2019 FTA Report No. 0143 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Ingrid Bartinique and Joshua Hassol Volpe National Transportation Systems Center COVER PHOTO Courtesy of Edwin Adilson Rodriguez, Federal Transit Administration DISCLAIMER This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Mobility Payment Integration: State-of-the- Practice Scan OCTOBER 2019 FTA Report No. 0143 PREPARED BY Ingrid Bartinique and Joshua Hassol Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 55 Broadway, Kendall Square Cambridge, MA 02142 SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 AVAILABLE ONLINE https://www.transit.dot.gov/about/research-innovation FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i Metric Conversion Table SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.61 kilometers km VOLUME fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL gal gallons 3.785 liter L ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3 MASS oz ounces 28.35 grams g lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg megagrams T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 Mg (or “t”) (or “metric ton”) TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) o 5 (F-32)/9 o F Fahrenheit Celsius C or (F-32)/1.8 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No.
    [Show full text]
  • APTA 2017 Adwheel Awards
    APTA 2017 AdWheel Awards Category 1: Best Marketing and Communications to Increase Ridership and Sales Hop Fastpass Contents Effectiveness Statement ………. 3 Print Media ………………………….. 5 Outreach Brochure ………………………………… 5 Print Ad …………………………………………………. 6 Transit Ads .………………………….. 5 Ads on Transit Vehicles/System ….………….. 7 Channel Card Series ……………………………... 8 Collateral ……………………………. 10 Retail Network Display Kit ……..…………….. 10 Retail Display Rack ………………………………. 11 Electronic Media …………………. 12 Website ………………………….……..…………….. 12 Outreach Email …………………………………..... 13 Online Videos ……………………………………….. 14 Special Event ……………………... 15 “Hop-Up” Event ……………………………………. 15 The HopMobile …………………………………….. 16 Opening Ceremony Video ……………………… 17 Promotional Items ………………………………... 17 Mascot …………………………………………………. 17 Social Media ……………….……… 18 Facebook Posts …………………………………….. 18 Partnership ………………………... 19 Press Event Sponsor Photo ……………………. 19 2 Effectiveness Statement APTA 2017 AdWheel Awards Category 1: Best Marketing and Communications to Increase Ridership and Sales Hop Fastpass 1. Target The primary audience is all TriMet, Portland Streetcar, and C-TRAN riders. The secondary audience includes the general public of the Portland-Vancouver metro area, transit employees, occasional transit riders, visitors, stakeholders and services that provide fare for their clients. 2. Situation/Challenge Hop Fastpass is the new regional e-fare system that works on TriMet, Portland Streetcar and C-TRAN. The biggest challenge was introducing a new fare technology across three different
    [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]
  • CSCIP Module 5 - Payments and Financial Transactions Final - Version 3 - October 8, 2010 1 for CSCIP Applicant Use Only
    Module 5: Smart Card Usage Models – Payments and Financial Transactions Smart Card Alliance Certified Smart Card Industry Professional Accreditation Program Smart Card Alliance © 2010 CSCIP Module 5 - Payments and Financial Transactions Final - Version 3 - October 8, 2010 1 For CSCIP Applicant Use Only About the Smart Card Alliance The Smart Card Alliance is a not-for-profit, multi-industry association working to stimulate the understanding, adoption, use and widespread application of smart card technology. Through specific projects such as education programs, market research, advocacy, industry relations and open forums, the Alliance keeps its members connected to industry leaders and innovative thought. The Alliance is the single industry voice for smart cards, leading industry discussion on the impact and value of smart cards in the U.S. and Latin America. For more information please visit http://www.smartcardalliance.org . Important note: The CSCIP training modules are only available to LEAP members who have applied and paid for CSCIP certification. The modules are for CSCIP applicants ONLY for use in preparing for the CSCIP exam. These documents may be downloaded and printed by the CSCIP applicant. Further reproduction or distribution of these modules in any form is forbidden. Copyright © 2010 Smart Card Alliance, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction or distribution of this publication in any form is forbidden without prior permission from the Smart Card Alliance. The Smart Card Alliance has used best efforts to ensure, but cannot guarantee, that the information described in this report is accurate as of the publication date. The Smart Card Alliance disclaims all warranties as to the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of information in this report.
    [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]
  • Final Table of Contents.Pub
    Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2010 congestion management program Board of Directors Don Knabe Board Chairman Los Angeles County Supervisor Fourth Supervisorial District Antonio R. Villaraigosa 1st Vice Chair Mayor, City of Los Angeles Michael D. Antonovich 2nd Vice Chair Los Angeles County Supervisor Fifth Supervisorial District Diane DuBois City Council Member, Lakewood John Fasana City Council Member, Duarte José Huizar City Council Member, Los Angeles Richard Katz City of Los Angeles Gloria Molina Los Angeles County Supervisor First Supervisorial District Ara Najarian Mayor, City of Glendale Pam O’Connor City Council Member, Santa Monica Mark Ridley-Thomas Los Angeles County Supervisor Second Supervisorial District Rita Robinson City of Los Angeles Zev Yaroslavsky Los Angeles County Supervisor Third Supervisorial District Los Angeles County Prepared by: Long Range Planning Metropolitan Transportation Authority and Coordination One Gateway Plaza Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 213.922.6000 metro.net 2010 Congestion Management Program Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer Martha Welborne, Executive Director, Countywide Planning Bradford W. McAllester, Executive Officer, Long Range Planning and Coordination Congestion Management Program Staff: Heather Hills, Director, Long Range Planning Stacy Alameida, Transportation Planning Manager/CMP Program Manager Scott Hartwell, Transportation Planner Doreen Morrissey, Transportation Planner TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter
    [Show full text]
  • Chris Tucker Principal
    Chris Tucker Principal Summary Mr. Tucker has 18 years of experience as a team leader and Program Manager, and ten years leading fare collection at TriMet, including six overseeing the implementation of TriMet’s new world-class electronic payment system. He is known as an industry expert in managing transport payment system projects from concept through implementation, including procurement, establishing intergovernmental agreements, policy development, partner integrations, testing, launch planning, and system operations. Mr. Tucker has a particularly focus in customer experience, education, and outreach, with ten years of experience managing and improving call center operations for two Fortune 500 companies, and one public transport operator. Throughout his career, Mr. Tucker has been well known for his ability to turn around fledgling departments and projects. Mr. Tucker is one of the founders of Clevor Consulting Group, a boutique consulting firm focused on bringing unique technical talent to the transport industry. As Managing Partner, Mr. Tucker helps transport agencies implement electronic payments by providing the in-depth experience and knowledge necessary to deliver well-designed, customer-friendly technology solutions, while improving operations and the user experience. Project Experience Hop Fastpass® Fare Payment System, TriMet, Portland, OR, November 2011-Present Launched in the summer of 2017, this $35M regional, bi-state fare collection system was delivered on schedule and under budget, and pushes both technical and policy
    [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]