Coordinated Mobility Plan: Prosperity Region 4
Counties Allegan Barry Ionia Lake Kent Mason Mecosta Montcalm
Muskegon
Newago
Oceana
Osceola Ottawa
May 2016
Prepared for Michigan 2-1-1 and Michigan Department of Transportation
Prepared by KFH Group, Inc. Bethesda, Maryland
Acknowledgements
This plan is a component of a Veterans Transit Community Living Initiative (VTCLI) grant through the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Michigan 2-1-1 and the Michigan Department of Transportation’s (MDOT) Office of Passenger Transportation led a statewide transportation study to identify regional gaps in mobility, particularly for people with limited transportation options such as veterans, older adults, individuals with disabilities and people with lower incomes. The result of the statewide study is ten coordinated mobility plans based geographically on Governor Snyder’s Prosperity Initiative. This is the Coordinated Mobility Plan for Prosperity Region 4.
The statewide study built upon efforts by MDOT and Regional Planning Agencies and Metropolitan Planning Organizations to document what is known about regional transit mobility. These efforts were in response to the Governor’s special message to the legislature on the topic of aging, titled “Making Michigan a Great Place to Live Well and Age Well”.
Advisory Committee
The statewide transportation study was guided by the following advisory committee:
Tom Page, Michigan 2-1-1 Clark Harder, Michigan Public Transit Scott Dzurka, Michigan Association of United Association Ways Donna McDowell, City of Livonia Maricela Alcala, Gryphon Place 2-1-1 MaLissa Schutt, Shiawassee Area Andy Brush, Michigan Dept of Transportation Transportation Agency Gale Capling, Clinton Area Transit System Valerie Shultz, Michigan Dept of Felicia Cross, City of Livonia Transportation Corey Davis, Muskegon Area Transit System Sheryl D. Thompson, Michigan Dept of Health Sarah Green, The Rapid and Human Services Hassan Hammoud, United Way for Linda Tokarski, Gryphon Place 2-1-1 Southeastern Michigan Authority Sherri Vainavicz, Heart of West Michigan Vanessa Hansle, Ann Arbor Transportation United Way
Regional Assistance
The West Michigan Regional Planning Commission and the West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission provided assistance throughout the development of this plan, including reviewing interim documents and helping to coordinate outreach efforts.
Input from a wide range of stakeholders was a key component in the study. Special thanks to the stakeholders who participated in a regional workshop and provided input throughout the planning process. Their input was especially beneficial in the assessment of transportation needs in the region, and in the development of potential strategies, activities and projects to improve mobility. In addition, appropriate information and pictures were obtained from the websites of some regional stakeholders.
Consultant Team
KFH Group, Inc. conducted outreach efforts, facilitated the regional workshop and led the development of this regional plan.
Coordinated Mobility Plan Prosperity Region 4
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Chapter 1 – Background
Introduction ...... 1-1 Building upon the Governor’s Special Message on Aging ...... 1-1 Meeting the Federal Coordinated Transportation Planning Requirements ...... 1-3 A Blueprint for the Future ...... 1-3 Plan Contents ...... 1-4
Chapter 2 – Outreach and Planning Process
Introduction ...... 2-1 Regional Workshops ...... 2-1 Prosperity Region 4 Workshop ...... 2-2 Ongoing Stakeholder Input ...... 2-3 Michigan Statewide Transit Plan Website ...... 2-3
Chapter 3 –Previous Plans and Studies
Introduction ...... 3-1 Implementing the Governor’s Special Message on Aging: Phase 1 ...... 3-1 West Michigan Transit Linkages Study ...... 3-2 Coordinated Transportation Plans ...... 3-3
Chapter 4 – Assessment of Transportation Needs
Introduction ...... 4-1 Regional Connectivity ...... 4-1 Expanded Transportation Services ...... 4-2 Improved and Expanded Outreach, Marketing and Education ...... 4-3 Improved Coordination ...... 4-3 Additional Funding ...... 4-3 Other Needs ...... 4-4
Coordinated Mobility Plan Prosperity Region 4
Table of Contents Chapter 5 – Demographics Analysis
Introduction ...... 5-1 Population Profile...... 5-1 Transit Dependent Populations ...... 5-5 Title VI Demographic Analysis ...... 5-15 Land Use Profile ...... 5-20
Chapter 6 – Current Transportation Services and Resources
Introduction ...... 6-1 Public Transit ...... 6-1 Non-Profit and Human Service Transportation Providers ...... 6-10 Private Transportation Providers ...... 6-14 Non-Emergency Medical Transportation ...... 6-15
Chapter 7 – Prioritized Strategies
Introduction ...... 7-1 High Priority Goals ...... 7-2 Low Priority Goals ...... 7-9
Chapter 8 – Ongoing Arrangements
Chapter 9 – Adoption Process
Appendix A: Coordinated Planning Guidance Appendix B: Michigan Statewide Transit Study Workshop Agenda Appendix C: West Michigan Regional Transit Mobility Memorandum
Coordinated Mobility Plan Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 1: Background Chapter 1 Background
INTRODUCTION
Michigan 2‐1‐1 is a free, confidential service that provides information and referral to transportation services, health and human services, community preparedness, and crisis information. A program of the Michigan Association of United Ways (MAUW), Michigan 2‐1‐1 works with eight regional 2‐1‐1 providers on a shared/common delivery platform to connect Michiganders with over 7,800 agencies offering over 29,000 services across the state.
With funding from a Veterans Transit Community Living Initiative (VTCLI) grant through the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Michigan 2‐1‐1 and their partners are developing the joint capacity to provide One‐Call/One‐Click service to Michigan residents to assist with individual trip planning and to address transportation barriers limiting opportunities for employment, health care, recreation and other personal needs. The VTCLI grant, supplemented with state and federal funding administered by the Michigan Department of Transportation’s (MDOT) Office of Passenger Transportation, involved a statewide transportation study to identify regional gaps in mobility, particularly for people with limited transportation options such as veterans, older adults, individuals with disabilities, and people with lower incomes. The study also involved identifying actions that can be taken by local transportation providers and Michigan 2‐1‐1 to increase regional mobility.
Input from a wide range of stakeholders was a key component in the study. Outreach efforts were based on Governor Snyder’s Regional Prosperity Initiative that established ten regions to create a better structure for collaboration. Workshops were conducted in each region, and provided the opportunity to discuss transportation needs and to obtain input on potential strategies, projects, and services to improve regional mobility.
The result of the statewide transit study is coordinated mobility plans based geographically on the Governor’s Prosperity Initiative. This is the Coordinated Mobility Plan for Prosperity Region 4 that includes Allegan, Barry, Ionia, Lake, Kent, Mason, Mecosta, Montcalm, Muskegon, Newago, Oceana, Osceola, and Ottawa Counties as shown in Figure 1‐1.
BUILDING UPON THE GOVERNOR’S SPECIAL MESSAGE ON AGING
The statewide transit study built upon efforts to document what is known about regional transit mobility. On June 2, 2014, Governor Snyder released a special message to the legislature on the topic of aging, titled “Making Michigan a Great Place to Live Well and Age Well”. The special message included the following language regarding access to transportation: “Michiganders, including many older adults, need regional mobility and transit providers need to become more regionally focused. This is both an urban and rural issue”.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 1-1 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 1: Background
In his message the Governor asked MDOT to partner with Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) and Regional Planning Agencies (RPA) across the State to work on the issue of regional transit mobility. Subsequently, MDOT worked with MPOs and RPAs to undertake a planning effort that
Figure 1‐1: Regional Map of Prosperity Region 4 – West Michigan
Coordinated Mobility Plan 1-2 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 1: Background documented what is known about the need for regional transit mobility and the ability for customers to use current transit services for cross county or cross system trips. Information from the reports that resulted from this planning effort has been appropriately incorporated into this regional plan.
MEETING THE FEDERAL COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
On July 6, 2012, President Obama signed into law Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP‐21) that went into effect on October 1, 2012. This legislation continued the coordinated transportation planning requirements for the Section 5310 Program administered by FTA. The purpose of the Section 5310 Program is to enhance mobility for seniors and persons with disabilities by providing funds for programs to serve the special needs of transit‐dependent populations beyond traditional public transportation services and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) complementary paratransit services.
This Coordinated Mobility Plan is also designed to meet the coordinated transportation planning requirements. Along with those in other regions, it ensures that the entire State of Michigan is covered by plans that meet the federal requirements. Each of the plans incorporates the four required elements:
(1) An assessment of available services that identifies current transportation providers (public, private and nonprofit).
(2) An assessment of transportation needs for individuals with disabilities and seniors. This assessment can be based on the experiences and perceptions of the planning partners or on more sophisticated data collection efforts, and gaps in service.
(3) Strategies, activities, and/or projects to address the identified gaps between current services and needs, and opportunities to achieve efficiencies in service delivery.
(4) Priorities for implementation based on resources (from multiple program sources), time and feasibility for implementing specific strategies and/or activities identified.
A BLUEPRINT FOR THE FUTURE
This plan is also consistent with FTA coordinated transportation planning guidance that encourages broad efforts that incorporate activities offered under a variety of transportation programs sponsored by federal, state, and local agencies to greatly strengthen its impact. Taking into account the VTCLI grant, efforts through the Governor’s Special Message on Aging, and the Section 5310 coordinated transportation planning requirements, this plan takes a wide approach and includes information on a variety of transportation services offered in the region. This plan also provides strategies and potential projects beyond public transit services.
The Coordinated Mobility Plan for Prosperity Region 4 is therefore designed to serve as a blueprint and a practical document for future discussions and efforts in the region to improve regional mobility,
Coordinated Mobility Plan 1-3 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 1: Background
especially for veterans, older adults, people with disabilities, people with lower incomes, and young people without access to transportation. However, this plan is not directly connected to any additional funding programs or sources, and does not obligate any agencies or organizations at the local, regional or state level to fund services included in the plan. Additional assessment would be needed to determine the costs and benefits prior to pursuing any of these recommendations and implementation would require re‐allocation of existing financial resources.
PLAN CONTENTS
The Coordinated Mobility Plan for Prosperity Region 4 is presented in the following order:
Chapter 1 (this chapter) provides background information on planning process.
Chapter 2 discusses the outreach process and the involvement of regional stakeholders in the coordinated mobility planning process.
Chapter 3 provides a review of recent plans and studies in the region that are relevant to the study process or provide information on community transportation needs. This includes reports produced by RPAs and MPOs on what is known about the need for regional transit mobility
Chapter 4 provides an assessment of the transportation needs in the region based on qualitative data (input on needs from key stakeholders).
Chapter 5 provides an assessment of transportation needs in the region through quantitative data (U.S. Census and American Community Survey).
Chapter 6 provides an inventory of current transportation services in the region.
Chapter 7 presents strategies and potential projects to meet transportation needs as identified and prioritized by regional stakeholders.
Chapter 8 discusses proposed on‐going arrangements in the region to continue the momentum from the coordinated mobility planning process.
Chapter 9 provides the process for approval of this coordinated transportation plan.
Appendices A, B and C include various documents relevant to the planning process.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 1-4 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 2: Outreach and Planning Process Chapter 2 Outreach and Planning Process
INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses outreach efforts for the Michigan Statewide Transit Plan and the involvement of regional stakeholders in the coordinated mobility planning process. Federal coordinated planning guidance served as the foundation in the development of a broad approach that provided the opportunity for a diverse group of organizations to be involved.
REGIONAL WORKSHOPS
The outreach process for the Michigan Statewide Transit Study involved regional workshops that provided the opportunity to engage a variety of stakeholders, to confirm transportation needs, and to discuss potential strategies, projects, and services to improve regional mobility. With assistance from regional planning agencies and input from the project advisory committee ten workshops were scheduled for September, 2015 based on the Governor’s Prosperity Regions.
Recognizing that some stakeholders would have interest in multiple workshops the marketing for the workshops was conducted through a statewide outreach effort that highlighted the workshop in Prosperity Region 4 and those in the other nine regions. A statewide invitation list was developed that included various agencies organizations familiar with transportation issues, especially in regard to veterans, people with disabilities, older adults, and people with lower incomes. Collectively the invitation list was distributed to over 350 stakeholders. These stakeholders were encouraged to pass the invitation along through their contact lists to help ensure an even broader outreach effort. Ultimately the invitation to the regional workshops was distributed to:
Transportation planning agencies Public transportation providers Public transit associations Local and regional mobility managers Regional 2‐1‐1 contact centers MichiVan and local rideshare offices Private transportation providers Nonprofit transportation providers Volunteer transportation providers Past or current organizations funded under the Section 5310, JARC, and/or the New Freedom Programs Human service agencies funding, operating, and/or providing access to transportation services Advocacy organizations working on behalf of targeted populations Agencies that administer health, employment, or other support programs for targeted populations
Coordinated Mobility Plan 2-1 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 2: Outreach and Planning Process
Nonprofit human service provider organizations that serve the targeted populations Job training and placement agencies Housing agencies Healthcare facilities Mental health agencies Economic development organizations Faith‐based and community‐based organizations Employers and representatives of the business community Appropriate local or state officials and elected officials Policy analysts or experts
PROSPERITY REGION 4 WORKSHOP
On September 16, 2015 the workshop for Prosperity Region 4 was conducted in Muskegon. The agenda is included in Appendix B. The workshop attracted 50 participants including representatives from:
Aging programs Health service programs Human service agencies Local transit systems Michigan 2‐1‐1 Michigan Department of Health and Human Services Michigan Department of Transportation Planning agencies Workforce development agencies
The workshop began with discussion of previous work between MDOT the regional planning agencies, objectives for the study, and projected outcomes. The majority of the workshop was focused on obtaining input from participants on the unmet transportation needs in the region. Through breakout groups stakeholders were asked to provide input on transportation needs related to a variety of issues, including services, marketing, coordination, land use, and policy changes, coordination, and policies. They were encouraged to think beyond public transportation and to consider needs that could be addressed through various mobility options. The regional stakeholders also provided input on potential solutions to help meet identified needs.
Input from regional stakeholders through the workshop is included in various sections of this plan. Specifically, transportation needs identified by the group are detailed in Chapter 4. These needs were considered in the development of potential strategies, activities, and projects that are included in Chapter 7.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 2-2 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 2: Outreach and Planning Process
ONGOING STAKEHOLDER INPUT
While the workshop served as the only formal gathering of regional stakeholders, they had multiple opportunities throughout the planning process to review interim documents and provide input. This ongoing involvement included:
Reviewing and commenting on a summary of the transportation needs from the regional workshop. Reviewing and providing input on potential strategies, activities, and projects to be included in the regional plan. Prioritizing strategies identified as the most appropriate for improving mobility in the region. Reviewing and providing input on a draft version of this plan.
MICHIGAN STATEWIDE TRANSIT PLAN WEBSITE
To assist in outreach and planning efforts a project website was established at http://www.kfhgroup.com/michigan/statewidetransitplan.html. This website provided information on the regional workshops and access to interim documents.
Figure 2‐1: Home Page of the Michigan Statewide Transit Plan Project Website
Coordinated Mobility Plan 2-3 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies Chapter 3 Previous Plans and Studies
INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a review of recent plans and studies in the region that are relevant to the study process, or provide information on community transportation needs and potential solutions and. This review began with work completed by the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission for MDOT that incorporated several previous planning and study efforts. The chapter includes information from appropriate local county plans.
The issues and needs identified by previous planning processes were similar to those identified during the workshop in Prosperity Region 4. Key issues from previous planning reports and projects are summarized in the following sections. Stakeholder input and demographic analysis are discussed in later chapters. Together this will provide a broad transportation needs assessment.
IMPLEMENTING THE GOVERNOR’S SPECIAL MESSAGE ON AGING: PHASE 1
As discussed in Chapter 1, MDOT partnered with regional planning agencies regarding the issue of regional transit mobility in support of the Governor’s Special Message on Aging. These agencies worked with local transit agencies to document what is known about the need for regional transit mobility and the ability for customers to use current transit services for cross county or cross system trips.
In Region 4, the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission and the West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission partnered to created and distributed a survey to area transportation providers. This is included in Appendix C. These surveys included questions covering service area, regional demand, description of local and regional services, service to adjacent counties, descriptions of transit needs, and barriers to providing regional transit routes. General descriptions of the needs documented in the surveys are included below:
Funding is an issue especially in regards to crossing county lines without supportive funding. Sustainable regional services would require financial support of each community involved. Compounding the issue is flat funding from localities and the state. Nearly every transportation provider surveyed indicated this as a need.
There is need for general public trips across county boundaries. Many counties have programs for seniors and persons with disabilities.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-1 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
Geographic gaps in service were noted by many transportation providers. This was noted by providers in rural areas and those who wish to connect with larger transit systems in Grand Rapids and Muskegon.
There is unmet demand for commuter employment trips into Grand Rapids from surrounding communities.
There is need for updated technology, especially for information dissemination to the public.
There is need for additional capital investments into lift‐equipped vehicles.
There is need for positive media for transit which can support public transportation in the region.
There is need expansion of services for seniors and individuals with disabilities.
There is noted demand for Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority, Yates Dial‐A‐Ride, and Cadillac Wexford Transit Authority to provide regional trips to the Traverse City Bay Area.
Additional regional meetings are needed to keep open lines of communication to determine when and where coordination of services can be mutually beneficial.
There is need for additional weekend transportation.
The previous plans and studies that were used in the development of the report are highlighted next in this chapter.
WEST MICHIGAN TRANSIT LINKAGES STUDY
The West Michigan Transit Linkages study, developed from 2008 to 2012, engaged regional transit providers and other transit stakeholders to identify priority transit and mobility issues within and across county boundaries with the aim of creating a regional transit network. The report does not address the entire thirteen‐county Prosperity Region, but focuses on regional trips between Kent, Muskegon, and Ottawa Counties. Many issues experienced in this sub‐region are consistent with those identified anecdotally by transit providers in the surveys that were distributed in the Phase 1 report.
Top concerns related to regional transit mobility were identified as follows:
Creating links between existing public transit service areas for Harbor Transit, Macatawa Area Express, Muskegon Area Transit System, and RAPID.
Providing transportation from surrounding communities without existing public transit systems including Allendale Township, City of Coopersville, Georgetown Township, and City of Hudsonville.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-2 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
Fulfilling employment transportation needs focusing on large employers with at least 100 employees.
COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION PLANS
The review of previous plans and studies involved local coordinated transportation plans. While some plans are several years old, they offer insight into current regional mobility needs. Common themes identified in the coordinated plans include a need for more transportation, increased hours, increased number of service areas, services for older adults and people with low incomes, and transportation to employment and healthcare. The following section provides a synopsis of key findings in these plans.
Allegan County Area Wide Coordinated Public Transit – Human Service Plan
The Allegan County Coordinated plan was developed in cooperation with Allegan County Transportation, The Interurban Transit Authority, the Macatawa Area Express Transportation Authority, Allegan County Human Services, Allegan County Mental Health, Michigan Works!, and other community based agencies located in Allegan County. The plan was approved in 2010. It provides service area descriptions, an assessment of available transportation services, unmet transportation needs, outreach methods, and transportation strategies to meet the needs.
The following unmet transportation needs were documented in the plan:
Primary transportation needs are for employment, health care, human services, nutrition, and education. Secondary transportation needs include shopping, child care, social, cultural, recreation, and spiritual events.
Older adults need transportation to medical appointments, senior meal programs, shopping, and community events. Those who live outside public transportation service areas are often isolated from services.
Individuals with disabilities need transportation to remain independent. Transportation provides access to jobs and training opportunities in their communities. To maintain independence and mobility, transportation is needed in the outlying areas of Allegan County.
Individuals with limited incomes needs transportation to access employment, training, education, childcare, job search, health care and social services. Without county wide transportation, these individuals are left without availability to access employment, health care, and social services.
The Allegan County plan included strategies which were prioritized:
1. Continue to provide all current services.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-3 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
2. Gather data to identify unmet needs that would support a requirement to expand transportation for Employment, Senior Services, Medical or Healthcare, Human Service supports, and Social activities.
3. Develop a marketing plan to educate the community and local officials for unmet and ongoing need for transit related services.
4. Implement the MDOT‐SDNT grant to research and market unmet transportation needs and future vision for public transit in Allegan County. Evaluate and identify the cost associated with that need and explore all possible resources for transit funding. Develop a long range, five‐year plan for public transit with recommendations for a funding mechanism.
5. Take an aggressive approach to explore the impact of transit millage.
6. Hold focus group meetings to help educate the public and local officials on how to best use current transportation. Educate passengers on how to get the best service from transit providers.
7. Evaluate the most efficient way to provide and coordinate volunteer transportation in Allegan County for persons with disabilities and seniors. Develop processes to eliminate duplication of services and insure effective mobility management.
8. Develop programs to expand transportation services to seniors in Allegan County with funding from the Commission on Aging.
Ionia County Area Wide Coordinated Public Transit – Human Service Plan
The Ionia County plan was developed through a collaborative effort with Ionia County Human Service Agencies, Ionia Area Dial‐A‐Ride, Belding Dial‐A‐Ride, Ionia County Memorial Hospital, Belding and Saranac Housing Commissions, Michigan Works!, and other community based agencies in Ionia County. The plan was developed in 2007 and identified the following needs:
There is no county wide public transportation. There is limited job access service. There is no evening service. There are long waiting times during peak hours. There is no centralized dispatch/transportation information center.
The Transportation Service Plan section of the coordinated plan outlines potential strategies for meeting needs. The following strategies have been prioritized:
1. Develop a mechanism through which county wide public transportation can be provided.
2. Expand job access service to include all of Ionia County on zoned, demand response subscription service.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-4 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
3. Identify barriers to enhance service hours.
4. Educate passengers on how to get the best service from transit providers.
5. Ensure that each agency has referral phone numbers and general information about community transportation services in Ionia County.
Interurban Transit Partnership Coordinated Public Transit – Human Service Transportation Plan
The Interurban Transit Partnership, known as the RAPID, is the public transportation provider for the metropolitan Grand Rapids region. This coordinated plan was completed in 2013 and has seized upon research conducted for the Kent County Transit Needs Assessment Study which was released in 2013. The plan developed the following strategies to meet current outstanding transportation needs in the region:
1. Continue to provide existing transportation service. 2. Increase operational funding for additional days/hours/frequency of transit service. 3. Add additional equipment, lift‐equipped vehicles, and maintenance support equipment. 4. Continue developing coordinated efforts. 5. Expand services for individuals with disabilities and seniors. 6. Add proven technology such as AVLs, GPS capable phone alerts, and vehicle cameras. 7. Coordinate non‐emergency medical transportation with human service providers. 8. Coordinate publicly funded transportation with private transportation options. 9. Advocate with local elected officials to improve support for public transportation services.
Lake, Mason, and Oceana Counties Coordinated Plan
The Lake, Mason, and Oceana coordinated plan details transportation needs of the three counties collectively. The plan was developed in 2007 in coordination with area transit providers, human service agencies, area schools, and other social service agencies.
If a senior has an emergency at night and is taken to the hospital for a procedure, they have no transportation home.
People under the age of 60 who have medical needs and cannot be sent out‐of‐county on a bus.
Areas are served but not always at times when services are needed.
School districts in the area are trying to consolidate and there could be potential for putting programs together at a central location.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-5 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
The plan offers strategies aimed at addressing the service gaps identified above:
Expand service to 24/7 with more volunteer drivers and more stipends.
Find out if there is some benefit for volunteer drivers through the IRS.
Use the volunteer services for pick up at WSCC. The college is willing to coordinate with class schedules.
Continue to keep the public aware of services. There is need to distribute publicity for services that are available and how they work.
Mesosta Osceola Coordinated Public Transit – Human Service Transportation Plan
The Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority (MOTA) took the initiative to lead development of the coordinated planning process. The coordinated plan, developed in 2007, was developed through a collaborative effort between regional transportation providers and regional stakeholders in a round table meeting. Areas of need highlighted during the meeting included transportation to: work after hours and on weekends, the emergency room and home, Sunday church services, and the Michigan prison re‐entry initiatve. Other areas of need are general week and weekend public transportation, transportation for out‐of‐county senior citizens needing to go grocery shopping, banking, to the hairdresser and to run errands, and for out‐of‐county Ferris student transportation.
The plan identified three priorities for implementation:
1. Getting low income individuals to work by utilizing JARC dollars. Service provided via a part time MOTA employee and/or volunteers being reimbursed mileage.
2. Contacting local employers to see if there is need for service to get employees to and from work.
3. Agency directed needs include emergency room to home after hours/weekends, county senior citizens, Michigan prison re‐entry initiative, after hours and weekend service, and Sunday church services.
Montcalm County Coordinated Public Transit – Human Service Transportation Plan
The 2007 Montcalm County coordinated plan covers transportation options within the county and outlines the following transportation needs:
Lack of transportation for persons with disabilities Lack of transportation for older adults. Lack of transportation for low income.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-6 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
Lack of transportation out‐of‐county, specifically for non‐medical. Lack of transportation for weekend dialysis.
Strategies in the plan to meet these needs and gaps were:
Vehicles with technology to transport disabled persons are considered the most reachable goal at the current time. With the addition of ramped vans through the Commission on Aging, more accessibility to older adults and disabled individuals county‐wide. Low income older adults would have high priority to receive services. This need will be even more drastic if the county decides to eliminate the Ambu‐Cab in the future due to financial shortfalls created by the program.
County‐wide public transportation was considered most likely to meet all of the needs of all age groups, low‐income, and disabled. Resources, time and feasibility for implementing this strategy does not allow for implementation in the near future. Montcalm County has been researching this strategy for a number of years and has not yet determined it to be fiscally feasible options for such a rural area.
Muskegon County Coordinated Human Services – Public Transportation Plan
The 2015 Muskegon County Coordinated Human Service Plan was prepared by an interest group of transportation providers, human service agencies, and others in the Muskegon County area, and by the local lead agency, the West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission. In a qualitative assessment of transportation needs the following were identified and prioritized:
1. Regional cross‐county transportation. 2. Long term transportation planning process included in community planning. 3. Too many transfers needed in certain transit trips. 4. Connectivity for all areas including rural transportation and Sunday service. 5. Shifting bus stigma that only low‐income, disabled, or elderly people should ride the bus. 6. Access to medical service is needed outside of the Muskegon area. 7. Fixed routes need to work better with work schedules. 8. Communication of the bus system especially for the illiterate.
The plan’s stakeholders also identified a number of possible solutions for further consideration, developing and funding. These solutions were presented and subsequently prioritized by plan participants. A listing of the strategies is included below:
1. Continued funding, enhancement, and support of existing programs.
2. Regional cross‐county transportation.
a. Inter local government agreements.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-7 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
b. Identify and understand exactly what the rules are.
c. Educate decision makers and public voters about transportation needs.
d. Safe, warm, transfer station.
e. Lobby for change.
3. Long term transportation planning process included in community planning.
a. Municipalities should include transit agency in planning process for developments, new business, recreation, medical, etc.
b. Zoning and planning should also consider transportation issues.
c. Communities should be walkable.
4. Too many transfers needed in certain transit trips.
a. Route study needed.
b. More direct routes during peak times.
Newaygo County Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan
The Newaygo County coordinated plan notes the rural nature of the county and the lack of transportation opportunities. There are currently no public transportation options in the county. The only existing transportation services are provided by human service agencies for specific programming. During stakeholder meetings the following needs were identified:
Maintain adequate number of vehicles for existing programs
Maintain adequate number of volunteers and a uniform reimbursement rate throughout the county
General transport for all county residents, regardless of age and income level (i.e. to/from hospital; to/from work; to/from human service agencies)
Storage and maintenance facilities for agency vehicles
Adequate funding for existing transportation programs; sufficient funding and support for a public transportation program. Expansion of programs when funding allows. Training opportunities for volunteers, agency staff and other programs/organizations
Continued funding for the Mobility Management position; provide a central place to obtain transportation information
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-8 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
Improved efficiencies for agencies providing transportation by investing in new technology (hardware and software)
It was also noted that without a public transportation system, many of these transportation needs will continue to be critical issues in Newaygo County. The plan goes on to discuss potential solutions such as pooling resources for efficiency, providing additional training for program drivers, and attempts to diversify funding.
Oceana County Coordinated Plan
The Oceana County coordinated plan was developed in 2013 with support from the Oceana County Council on Aging, the only provider of public transportation in Oceana County. The plan includes all of the required elements of a coordinated plan but is brief in nature. The identified unmet needs include additional service to outlying areas and making transportation more affordable to county residents. The following strategies were developed to address the transportation needs:
Continuation of existing programs Additional technology to improve efficiency Additional funding Expansion of service (more vehicles and longer hours of service)
Ottawa County Coordinated Public Transit – Human Services Transportation Plan
The Ottawa County coordinated plan was developed in 2009 through coordination with Macatawa Area Express Transportation Authority, Harbor Transit, and local human service agencies. Some of the transportation needs identified in the plan were:
Lack of countywide and regional transportation is a major barrier. This is especially true in rural areas where transportation services are extremely limited.
Early morning and late evening transportation for first and second shift jobs.
Eastern Ottawa County is the largest population base in Ottawa County, but does not have any public transportation systems for its residents, other than Georgetown Seniors Transportation.
Kandu Inc. employs approximately 300 adults with disabilities in Holland. Most of the employees need transportation to get to work. Many live in outlying areas of the county such as Jenison, Coopersville, or Allendale.
Unemployed or low income adults frequently do not have access to transportation to get to needed programs or jobs.
Adults with moderate to severe disabilities need transportation to CMH’s community based education sites. Many of these individuals use wheelchairs.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-9 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
Georgetown Senior Center in Georgetown Township serves seniors through adult enrichment, community outings and meal programs. Many seniors cannot drive due to age‐related conditions and need transportation to critical services.
Medical transportation is a tremendous need. Many individuals needing medical transportation have very limited financial resources and cannot pay much for transportation. Development of the major medical corridor in Grand Rapids is also creating more need for individuals to access medical treatment in Kent County.
Many Pioneer Resources’ passengers need additional assistance beyond standard curb‐to‐curb service. Of the 400‐500 passengers transported daily by Pioneer Resources, two areas requiring enhanced service beyond ADA have been identified. The first area is assisting seniors and adults with disabilities from the vehicle, up the driveway, and up the steps or ramps into their homes. Once in their home, they need assistance transferring wheelchairs and walkers. They are often unable to open the door and maneuver into their home safely. The second area is personal assistance while riding the vehicle and entering the destination. Many parents or caregivers of adults with disabilities transported by Pioneer report that the individual needs personal attention during transportation to assist with behavioral concerns, help with ambulatory devices, assist with coats, identify stops and extra assistance with boarding or alighting, and getting into jobs, educational programs and medical buildings.
Walkway improvements and other accessible features are needed so MAX’s fixed route bus stops are more accessible to wheelchair users and disabled passengers
Comprehensive research to determine unmet transportation needs and solutions within communities in Ottawa County
Affordable transportation options due to high fuel costs
Affordable regional connectivity
Better coordination of transportation services between current transportation providers
Difficulty accessing transportation during early morning and late night hours for jobs that require flexible hours
Limited service hours are a barrier to medical appointments. Dialysis facilities frequently operate early in the morning and late in the evening, and on holidays.
Seniors have difficulty getting to needed day‐programs and support services. Seniors who live outside public transit areas do not have transportation to programs that support their needs such as physical therapy, dementia care, meal programs, and volunteer and recreational programs.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-10 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
The primary strategies/activities to address public transit/human service needs include:
Continue existing funding for all existing services. This includes continued Section 5310 funding for both Pioneer Resources and Georgetown Seniors, continued JARC funding for Pioneer Resources’ transportation to work services, continued New Freedom funding for Pioneer Resources’ transportation above ADA requirements for disabled seniors, and continued New Freedom funding for MAX’s late evening service.
Continue existing funding for education, coordination and mobility management. This includes continued New Freedom funding for Pioneer Resources’ and MAX’s mobility management projects.
Continue existing funding for technology investments to improve efficiency. This includes continued New Freedom funding for MAX’s mobile data equipment project.
Find more funding for extended service hours (late night, weekends and holidays).
Find more funding to expand service areas.
Find more funding for technology investments to improve efficiency.
Find more funding for walkway improvements, curb cuts, passenger shelters, information kiosks, and other communication/education tools to make public transportation more accessible to wheelchair users and other passengers.
Invest in maintenance structures, maintenance equipment and other maintenance technology to ensure public transportation vehicles are well maintained.
Invest in improved communication between providers; and between providers and the public, to ensure greatest efficiency.
Find more funding for capital investments to expand public transportation.
Continue to educate businesses, government leaders, agencies and individuals about transportation solutions in our communities.
Encourage community participation in transit studies.
Yates Dial-A-Ride Coordinated Plan
The Yates Dial‐A‐Ride plan was developed in 2007 and included information on existing transportation services and transportation needs in the county. Identified gaps in service were:
Transportation for seniors who have an emergency and must be taken to the hospital but have no way to get transportation home.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-11 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 3: Previous Plans and Studies
Transportation for grocery shopping trips. Transportation for residents under age 60 who have medical needs outside the county. Need to expand bus spans so that more areas are covered at more times. Transportation to work across county lines.
Strategies in the plan to meet these needs and gaps were:
Expand service to 24/7. Determine if volunteer drivers are eligible for tax breaks and community benefits. Use volunteer services for trips to and from WSCC. Continue publicity of currently available services.
Priorities in the plan were:
Increase access to employment and job training opportunities. Target medical services needed. Combine after hour needs for seniors and non‐seniors medical appointments.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 3-12 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 4: Assessment of Transportation Needs Chapter 4 Assessment of Transportation Needs
INTRODUCTION
This section details unmet transportation needs and gaps in mobility identified by regional stakeholders at the Prosperity Region No. 4 workshop conducted on September 16, 2015 in Muskegon. The workshop attracted over 50 participants, including representatives from transit systems, planning agencies, human service providers, 2‐1‐1 providers, advocacy groups, and riders. While many transportation needs are interrelated, they are broken out by key categories and issues.
The workshop began with introductions and a brief presentation that included discussion of study objectives and the role of the regional stakeholders. The majority of the workshop was focused on obtaining input from participants on unmet transportation needs in the region. Workshop participants broke into four groups: needs around Muskegon, needs around Grand Rapids, rural needs and regional needs. Each group was charged with identifying five needs and possible solutions for each need.
Results from the workshop will be incorporated into an overall transportation needs assessment that involves:
Transportation needs identified in previous plans and studies. Analysis of demographic data using current information from the U.S. Census.
REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY
The number one problem in the region is the inability to cross jurisdictional lines:
There is little service beyond cities and towns.
Operators are not prepared to provide service beyond their service area making commuter and specialized medical service difficult.
There is a need for clarity and revision of rules for connecting counties. There are too many rumors floating around. The biggest need is connectivity between jurisdictions.
There is a need for a regional service provider.
Oceana County has specialized services for elderly and disabled but nothing is available for general public trips and funding is very limited for medical trips to Ludington and Muskegon.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 4-1 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 4: Assessment of Transportation Needs
Transportation from Ludington to Muskegon to Grand Rapids (and locations in between) is lacking especially for commuters and medical trips.
In Ottawa County, there is a need for residents in the northwest of the county to reach Muskegon and residents in the southeast to reach Grand Rapids.
There is a need for vanpooling and promotion of ridesharing.
EXPANDED TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
Trip Purpose
Certain grant programs only allow funding for specific population groups which has discouraged the grouping of trips. Most door‐to‐door services may experience delays and longer trips which has contributed to limiting shared rides.
There is need for transportation to large employment centers.
There is need for transportation for students. Growth of charter schools in the region has led to issues with transit systems picking up students in remote areas.
Time Related
There is a need for locating resources for after‐hour ADA trips. Most taxicabs are not accessible.
Service hours often exclude commuting. Many systems end their day too early to meet commuter needs for even an 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. shift.
Place/Destination
There is a need for addressing gaps in the service area including regional destinations where local residents typically go for goods, services, work, school and other destinations.
In Mason County, Ludington Transit does not have access to Meijer and ends service too early for return employment trips.
Newaygo County is facing elimination of New Freedom funding which is used to support a large number of trips.
Many counties within the region have transportation gaps.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 4-2 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 4: Assessment of Transportation Needs
There are many underserved areas and/or with limited service.
There are gaps in local and regional destinations.
IMPROVED AND EXPANDED OUTREACH, MARKETING, AND EDUCATION
Transit needs to better educate the public about the benefits of transit and identify potential transit advocates in the community. Motivating younger populations to use public transportation.
There is a need for getting buy‐in from the community and politicians, i.e., marketing, education and promotion. . Collaboration with 2‐1‐1 will be important. o Informing the local population about 2‐1‐1 service changes before they happen. o Using 2‐1‐1 to provide data on unmet needs.
Many individuals living in poverty lack planning skills necessary to navigate existing transit services.
IMPROVED COORDINATION
There is need for greater coordination. o Grand Rapids is struggling with client shedding onto their ADA service. o Transit systems face challenges providing dialysis transportation with less than cooperative for profit dialysis centers. o Increased efficiency and being accountable to other systems in coordination efforts. o Coordinate driver training, maintenance and other functions.
Transit is not a major component of land development for the majority of communities in the region. This poses major challenges to serving new developments.
ADDITIONAL FUNDING
The region should continue seeking millage.
There is need to generate interest from the private sector. o Providing service. o Sponsorships and advertising.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 4-3 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 4: Assessment of Transportation Needs
Funding is needed for regional services.
There is a lack of diversity of funds. This is typical of remote counties with low populations.
OTHER NEEDS
Other issues include drivers, volunteers and commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs):
Liability issues prevent a number of grass roots transit programs; initiating insurance pools could promote the growth of transit.
Lack of volunteer drivers. Drivers must use their personal insurance policy when volunteering which has discouraged potential drivers.
Finding qualified drivers is difficult and training is cost prohibitive.
CDL licensing procedures are time consuming and very costly.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 4-4 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Chapter 5 Demographic Analysis
INTRODUCTION
This chapter analyzes demographic data and land use to assess the need for transit in Region 4 also known as the West Michigan Region. Data ranging from major trip generators to underserved and unserved population subgroups are documented and analyzed. Data sources include the 2010 Census and American Community Survey (ACS) 2009‐2013 5‐year estimates.
POPULATION PROFILE
The following section provides a general population profile for Region 4 and will identify and evaluate underserved population subgroups as well as review demographic characteristics pertinent to a Title VI analysis.
Table 5‐1 shows the census population counts from 1990‐2010.
Table 5‐1: Historical Populations for Region 4
1990‐2000 2000‐2010 1990‐2010 County 1990 Pop. 2000 Pop. 2010 Pop. % Change % Change % Change Allegan 90,509 105,665 111,408 16.7% 5.4% 23.1% Barry 50,057 56,755 59,173 13.4% 4.3% 18.2% Ionia 57,024 61,518 63,905 7.9% 3.9% 12.1% Kent 500,631 574,335 602,622 14.7% 4.9% 20.4% Lake 8,583 11,333 11,539 32.0% 1.8% 34.4% Mason 25,537 28,274 28,705 10.7% 1.5% 12.4% Mecosta 37,308 40,553 42,798 8.7% 5.5% 14.7% Montcalm 53,059 61,226 63,342 15.4% 3.5% 19.4% Muskegon 158,983 170,200 172,188 7.1% 1.2% 8.3% Newaygo 38,202 47,874 48,460 25.3% 1.2% 26.9% Oceana 22,454 26,873 26,570 19.7% ‐1.1% 18.3% Osceola 20,146 23,197 23,528 15.1% 1.4% 16.8% Ottawa 187,768 238,314 263,801 26.9% 10.7% 40.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Ottawa County has experienced the greatest population percent increase (41%) while Kent County had the greatest increase in total population (101,991 or 20 %). The Counties of Allegan, Lake, and Newaygo showed notable population growth levels of over 20%. These counties are simply the highlights in a region which has enjoyed marketed population growth since 1990. Only one county in this region lost
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-1 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis population between 1990 and 2010, Oceana County, which had a 1% drop in population between the 2000 and 2010 Census.
Table 5‐2 features population projections from the University of Michigan’s Institute for Research on Labor, Employment, and the Economy. This data suggests that the notable population growth seen in this region over the past couple of decades will likely slow and in some cases decline. From 2010 to 2040, the Counties of Lake, Montcalm, and Osceola are expected to experience a population decline. Whereas the Counties of Allegan, Mecosta, and Ottawa are expecting population growth rates in the double digits.
Table 5‐2: Future Population Trends for Region 4
2020 2030 2040 2010‐2040 2010 County Population Population Population Percent Population Estimate Estimate Estimate Change Allegan 111,408 118,582 126,526 134,790 21.0% Barry 59,173 61,302 62,510 63,098 6.6% Ionia 63,905 65,890 67,028 68,528 7.2% Kent 602,622 638,451 648,986 658,379 9.3% Lake 11,539 11,150 11,206 11,051 ‐4.2% Mason 28,705 30,075 30,624 30,382 5.8% Mecosta 42,798 43,930 45,790 47,121 10.1% Montcalm 63,342 63,247 62,981 62,762 ‐0.9% Muskegon 172,188 172,935 172,226 172,566 0.2% Newaygo 48,460 48,987 50,126 50,410 4.0% Oceana 26,570 26,940 27,960 28,922 8.9% Osceola 23,528 22,786 22,528 22,209 ‐5.6% Ottawa 263,801 282,328 290,280 296,449 12.4%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau and the Institute for Research on Labor, Employment and the Economy, University of Michigan
Population and its density are often used as an indicator for public transit services that are feasible within a specific area. While exceptions will always exist, an area with a density of 2,000 or more persons per square mile will typically be able to sustain daily fixed route transit service. An area with a population density below 2,000 but above 1,000 persons per square mile may be a better candidate for deviated fixed route and areas with densities below 1,000 are typically best suited for demand response service.
Figure 5‐1 shows Western Michigan’s population at the census block group level. Overall, Region 4’s population is tied to the major urban centers of Grand Rapids and Muskegon. Census block groups with populations over 4,000 are located in the Counties of Kent and Ottawa.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-2 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐1: 2010 Census Population
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-3 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐2 provides population density for the Western Michigan Region. Areas with a population density of over 2,000 people per square mile include Allegan, Belding, Big Rapids, Ludington, Grand Haven, Grand Rapids, Greenville, Hart, Hastings, Holland, Hudsonville, Ionia, Kentwood, Montague, Muskegon, Otsego, Portland, Reed City, and Wyoming.
Figure 5‐2: 2010 Census Population Density
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-4 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
TRANSIT DEPENDENT POPULATIONS
Transit Dependence Index
The need for public transportation is often derived by recognizing the size and location of segments of the population most dependent on transit services. Transit dependency can be a result of many factors, i.e., no access to a personal vehicle, age, and income. Establishing the location of transit dependent populations aids in the evaluation of the current population while identifying potential gaps in transit services.
The Transit Dependence Index (TDI) is an aggregate measure displaying relative concentrations of transit dependent populations. Five factors make up the TDI calculation including population density, autoless households, elderly populations (ages 65 and over), youth populations (ages 10‐17), and below poverty populations.
In addition to population density, the factors above represent specific socioeconomic characteristics. For each factor, individual block groups were classified according to the frequency of the vulnerable population relative to the county average. Factors were then put into the TDI equation to determine the relative transit dependence of each block group.
The relative classification system utilizes averages in ranking populations. For example, areas with less than the average transit dependent population fall into the “Very Low” classification, where areas that are more than twice the average will be classified as “Very High.” The classifications “Low, Moderate, and High” fall between the average and twice the average. These classifications are divided into thirds.
Figure 5‐3 displays the TDI rankings for Region 4. The areas recognized to have Very High transit need with respect to density are Big Rapids, Grand Haven, Grand Rapids, Greenville, Hart, Hastings, Holland, Ionia, Jenison, Kentwood, Ludington, Muskegon, Reed City, Sparta, Spring Lake, Wyoming, and Zeeland.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-5 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐3: Transit Dependence Index Density
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-6 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
The Transit Dependence Index Percent (TDIP) provides a complementary analysis to the TDI measure. It is similar to the TDI measure however it excludes the population density factor. The TDIP for each block group in the study area was calculated based on autoless households, elderly populations, youth populations, and below poverty populations.
By removing the population density factor, TDIP is able to measures the degree or percentage of vulnerability. It follows the TDI’s five‐tiered categorization of Very Low to Very High. The results of this analysis are typically much more dispersed than the TDI because many of the larger, or rural, block groups may have a larger percentage of certain populations when compared to heavily populated areas.
Figure 5‐4 shows the TDIP rankings for Region 4. Block groups with “Very High” levels of dependence are found in and around Grand Rapids, Holland, Ludington, and Muskegon. As opposed to the TDI measure, areas of Allegan, Lake, and Newaygo Counties now show high and moderate levels of transit dependence.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-7 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐4: Transit Dependence Index Percentage
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-8 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Transit Dependence Index Factors
This subsection will review three of the five factors which make up the transit dependence index: youth population, senior adult population, and zero car households. Other than population, the fifth factor, individuals living at or below the poverty level, will be reviewed in the following section, Title VI Demographic Analysis. This section also provides a similar index for individuals with disabilities. While this data is not included in the TDI it is still important to review as those with disabilities may have difficultly driving a personal automobile.
Youth Population
Persons ages 10 to 17 either have not yet learned to drive or are just beginning to drive and often do not have a personal automobile accessible to them. For this population, public transit is often the means that offers mobility. Figure 5‐5 illustrates the concentrations of youth populations relative to the study area. The Counties of Kent, Ottawa, and Muskegon have a number of block groups with “Very High” distributions of youth populations. Others areas with “Very High” distributions include Allegan and Newaygo Counties.
Senior Adult Population
The senior adult population, which includes individuals 65 years and older, was used in the TDI measure. Persons in this age group may begin to decrease their use of a personal vehicle and begin to rely more on public transit. Figure 5‐6 shows the relative distribution of seniors in Region 4. Areas with “very high” senior populations include the suburbs of Grand Rapids, the lake front around Muskegon, and pockets throughout Barry, Mecosta, Newaygo, and Oceana Counties.
Individuals with Disabilities
Figure 5‐7 illustrates the disabled population in Region 4. The American Community Survey was used to obtain data for the disabled population. It is important to note that this data is only provided at the census tract level. Persons who have disabilities that prevent them or make it more difficult to own and operate a personal vehicle often rely on public transit for their transportation needs. Areas with “Very High” concentrations of individuals with disabilities may be found in central Oceana County.
Zero Car Households
Households without at least one personal vehicle are more likely to depend on the mobility offered by public transit. Although autoless households are reflected in both the TDI and TDIP measures, displaying this segment of the population separately is important since most land uses in Region 4 are at distances too far for non‐motorized travel. Figure 5‐8 displays the relative number of autoless households. Areas with “Very High” numbers of zero car households include Allegan, Baldwin, Belding, Big Rapids, Caledonia, Cedar Springs, Ferrysburg, Fremont, Grand Rapids, Greenville, Hastings, Ludington, Lyons, Otsego, Reed City, Walkerville, Wayland, and White Cloud.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-9 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐5: Distribution of the Youth Population (Ages 10 to 17)
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-10 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐6: Distribution of the Senior Adult Population (Aged 65 and Above)
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-11 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐7: Distribution of the Disabled Population
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-12 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐8: Zero Car Household Distribution
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-13 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
TITLE VI DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and activities receiving federal subsidies. This includes agencies providing federally funded public transportation. The following section examines the minority and below poverty level populations in Region 4.
Minority Population
It is important to ensure that areas with an above average percentage of racial and/or ethnic minorities are not negativity impacted by any proposed alterations to existing public transportation services. In Region 4 the average concentration of minority population in each census block group is 11.5%. Figure 5‐ 9 illustrates the concentration of minority populations based on the region’s average. As seen in the figure, areas with above average concentrations of minorities are dispersed around the Grand Rapids and Muskegon areas. More rural counties with above average concentrations of minorities are Allegan, Barry, Ionia, Newaygo, and Ottawa.
Below Poverty Level Population
The second group included in the Title VI analysis represents those individuals who earn less than the federal poverty level. This segment of the populations may find it a financial burden to own and maintain a personal vehicle, thus relying on public transit as their primary means of transportation. In Region 4’s census block groups, the average percentage of those living below the federal poverty level is 14.5%. Figure 5‐10 depicts the concentration of population above or below the average relative to the study area. As seen in the map, those living below the poverty line are heavily dispersed and widespread throughout the region. Clusters of above average poverty levels are present in Mason and Newaygo Counties as well as the large urban areas of Grand Rapids and Muskegon.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-14 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐9: Distribution of the Minority Population
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-15 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Figure 5‐10: Distribution of Individuals Living Below the Poverty Level
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-16 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
Limited-English Proficiency
In addition to providing public transportation for a diversity of socioeconomic groups, it is also important to serve and disseminate information to those of different linguistic backgrounds. As shown in Table 5‐3, the Western Michigan Region’s residents predominately speak English. In each county, with the exception of Kent (88.5%) and Oceana (88.4%), English is the primary language for over 90 percent of the residents. The most prevalent language in the region after English is Spanish with just over five percent of the population considering it their primary language. Counties with large concentrations of Spanish speakers are Oceana (10.6%), Kent (6.9%), and Ottawa (6.2%). Of those who primarily speak languages other than English the overwhelming majority is able to speak English “Very Well.” Of the entire region, approximately three percent of the population is unable to speak English “Very Well.”
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-17 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis Table 5‐3: Limited English Proficiency for Region 4
County Allegan Barry Ionia Kent Lake Population (5yrs and older) 105,199 55,849 60,105 571,603 10,984 Languages Spoken # % # % # % # % # % English 99,325 94.4% 54,392 97.4% 58,033 96.6% 505,637 88.5% 10,749 97.9% Speak Non‐English 5,874 5.6% 1,457 2.6% 2,072 3.4% 65,966 11.5% 235 2.1% Spanish 4,434 4.2% 814 1.5% 1,450 2.4% 39,630 6.9% 107 1.0% Indo‐European languages 986 0.9% 454 0.8% 373 0.6% 13,360 2.3% 119 1.1% Asian/Pacific languages 391 0.4% 139 0.2% 138 0.2% 9,414 1.6% 7 0.1% Other 63 0.1% 50 0.1% 111 0.2% 3,562 0.6% 2 0.0% Ability to Speak English: # % # % # % # % # % "Very Well" 3,852 3.7% 996 1.8% 1,346 2.2% 36,050 6.3% 220 2.0% Less than "Very Well" 2,022 1.9% 461 0.8% 726 1.2% 29,916 5.2% 15 0.1% County Mason Mecosta Montcalm Muskegon Newaygo Population (5yrs and older) 27,145 41,130 59,427 160,515 45,280 Languages Spoken # % # % # % # % # % English 25,926 95.5% 39,499 96.0% 57,586 96.9% 153,828 95.8% 43,039 95.1% Speak Non‐English 1,219 4.5% 1,631 4.0% 1,841 3.1% 6,687 4.2% 2,241 4.9% Spanish 657 2.4% 351 0.9% 820 1.4% 3,894 2.4% 1,621 3.6% Indo‐European languages 469 1.7% 753 1.8% 708 1.2% 1,834 1.1% 516 1.1% Asian/Pacific languages 61 0.2% 228 0.6% 207 0.3% 570 0.4% 29 0.1% Other 32 0.1% 299 0.7% 106 0.2% 389 0.2% 75 0.2% Ability to Speak English: # % # % # % # % # % "Very Well" 938 3.5% 1,156 2.8% 1,152 1.9% 4,590 2.9% 1,483 3.3% Less than "Very Well" 281 1.0% 475 1.2% 689 1.2% 2,097 1.3% 758 1.7% County Oceana Osceola Ottawa Population (5yrs and older) 24,623 21,950 252,270 Languages Spoken # % # % # % English 21,765 88.4% 21,025 95.8% 228,857 90.7% Speak Non‐English 2,858 11.6% 925 4.2% 23,413 9.3% Spanish 2,604 10.6% 194 0.9% 15,623 6.2% Indo‐European languages 242 1.0% 674 3.1% 3,130 1.2% Asian/Pacific languages 4 0.0% 21 0.1% 4,357 1.7% Other 8 0.0% 36 0.2% 303 0.1% Ability to Speak English: # % # % # % "Very Well" 1,667 6.8% 605 2.8% 15,070 6.0% Less than "Very Well" 1,191 4.8% 320 1.5% 8,343 3.3%
Source: American Community Survey, Five‐Year Estimates (2010‐2014), Table B16004.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-18 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis
LAND USE PROFILE
Regional Trip Generators
Identifying regional trip generators serves to complement the previous demographic analysis by indicating where transit services may be most needed. Trip generators attract transit demand and include common origins and destinations. Examples include higher level educational facilities, major employers, regional medical facilities, and Veteran Affair’s Medical Centers and Clinics. Figure 5‐11 provides a map of the regional trip generators in western Michigan. The trip generator categories are briefly detailed below.
Educational Facilities
Many individuals that comprise the school age population are unable to afford or operate their own personal vehicle; therefore, it may be assumed that this segment of the population is one that is reliant upon public transportation. Additionally, many faculty and staff members are associated with these institutions as a place of employment. Western Michigan features a number of colleges and universities including Central Michigan University, Grand Valley State University, and Ferris State University.
Major Employers
This section examines the top regional employers in Western Michigan. Employers included in this category were those that employ 500 or more workers. Providing transit services to major employment locations is advantageous to both the employee, as the individual is provided with direct access to their occupation and subsequent source of income, and the employer, as this entity will have assurance that their current or potential workforce will have diverse options of accessing the destination. Many major employers in Western Michigan include numerous colleges and universities as well as regional medical facilities. Manufacturing is a large part of the region’s economy with major employers including Alcoa Helmet, Steelcase, and Wolverine World Wide.
Major Medical Facilities
Major medical facilities, classified as regional and general hospitals, represent a significant destination for users of public transportation. Older adults and persons with disabilities often rely more heavily upon services offered by medical facilities than other population segments. Since older adults and persons with disabilities represent a large faction of the transit dependent population, it is imperative that these facilities are made accessible through public transit services.
Veteran Affairs Medical Facilities
The Department of Veterans Affairs oversees a network of medical centers and smaller community‐ based outpatient clinics. Locating transportation to these facilities can be a major barrier for veterans
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-19 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis who rely on healthcare that these facilities provide. The Battle Creek VA Medical Center, located in the southwest Michigan Prosperity Region is the closest for veterans in Western Michigan. Community based clinics are also located in Cadillac, Clare, Muskegon, and Wyoming but many of these locations do not offer the specialized service available at the medical center in Battle Creek.
Figure 5‐11: Regional Trip Generators
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-20 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis Local Trip Generators
In addition to major regional trip generators it is also important to identify communities containing local trip generators. Local trip generators attract transit demand and include common origins and destinations, like colleges and universities, multi‐unit housing, non‐ profit and governmental agencies, major employers, medical facilities, and shopping centers. Table 5‐4 shows local trip generators.
Table 5‐4: Local Trip Generators Human Human Shopping Shopping High High College/University College/University Major Major Medical Medical
Density Density
Service Service
Employer Employer Destinations Destinations
Trip Generators Facility Trip Generators Facility
Housing Housing
Agency Agency
Allegan County Mecosta County (cont.) Allegan Mecosta Douglas Morley Fennville Stanwood Hopkins Montcalm County Martin Carson City Otsego Edmore Plainwell Greenville Saugatuck Howard City Wayland Lake View Barry County McBride Freeport Pierson Hastings Sheridan Middleville Stanton Nashville Muskegon County Woodland Fruitport Ionia County Lakewood Club Belding Montague Clarksville Muskegon Hubbardston Muskegon Heights Ionia North Muskegon Lake Odessa Norton Shores Lyons Ravenna Muir Roosevelt Park Pewamo Twin Lake Portland Whitehall Saranac Wolf Lake
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-21 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis Human Human Shopping Shopping High High College/University College/University Major Major Medical Medical
Density Density
Service Service
Employer Employer Destinations Destinations
Trip Generators Facility Trip Generators Facility
Housing Housing
Agency Agency
Kent County Newaygo County Byron Center Fremont Caledonia Grant Casnovia Newaygo Cedar Springs White Cloud Comstock Park Oceana County Cutlerville Hart East Grand Rapids Hesperia Forest Hills New Era Grand Rapids Pentwater Grandville Rothbury Kent City Shelby Kentwood Walkerville Lowell Osceola County Rockford Evart Sand Lake Hersey Sparta Le Roy Walker Marion Wyoming Reed City Lake County Tustin Baldwin Ottawa County Luther Allendale Mason County Beechwood Custer Coopersville Fountain Ferrysburg Free Soil Grand Haven Ludington Holland Scottville Hudsonville Mecosta County Jenison Barryton Spring Lake Big Rapids Zeeland Canadian Lakes
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-22 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis Employment Travel Patterns
In addition to considering the locations of major employers, it is also beneficial to account for the commuting patterns of residents intra and inter‐regionally.
Table 5‐5 presents the results of the Census Bureau’s Journey to Work data which provides location of employment (in county vs. out of county and in state vs. out of state) and means of transportation to work. Residents in the West Michigan Region typically work in their county of residence (72%) and predominately drive alone to work (83%). On average, about one percent of each counties population commutes out of state for work. While the majority of residents drive alone to work, a small majority carpool (9%), making it the second largest means of commuting in the region. Public transportation garners approximately one percent or less of the employment commuting; Kent County had the highest percent share of public transportation trips with two percent.
Table 5‐5: Journey to Work Patterns for Region 4
County Allegan Barry Ionia Kent Lake Workers 16 Years and Older 49,552 25,642 25,522 289,771 3,085 Location of Employment # % # % # % # % # % In State of Residence 49,209 99.3% 25,293 98.6% 25,417 99.6% 287,873 99.3% 3,053 99.0% In County of Residence 22,769 45.9% 10,318 40.2% 12,372 48.5% 259,216 89.5% 1,484 48.1% Outside County of Residence 26,440 53.4% 14,975 58.4% 13,045 51.1% 28,657 9.9% 1,569 50.9% Outside State of Residence 343 0.7% 349 1.4% 105 0.4% 1,898 0.7% 32 1.0% Means of Transportation to Work # % # % # % # % # % Car, Truck, or Van ‐ drove alone 42,075 84.9% 21,680 84.5% 21,008 82.3% 237,659 82.0% 2,498 81.0% Car, Truck, or Van ‐ carpooled 4,066 8.2% 2,173 8.5% 2,735 10.7% 25,567 8.8% 343 11.1% Public Transportation 77 0.2% 26 0.1% 38 0.1% 5,299 1.8% 3 0.1% Walked 741 1.5% 543 2.1% 511 2.0% 5,396 1.9% 85 2.8% Taxicab, motorcycle, bicycle, other 448 0.9% 132 0.5% 235 0.9% 3,813 1.3% 61 2.0% Worked at Home 2,145 4.3% 1,088 4.2% 995 3.9% 12,037 4.2% 95 3.1% County Mason Mecosta Montcalm Muskegon Newaygo Workers 16 Years and Older 11,885 16,534 23,398 66,943 18,050 Location of Employment # % # % # % # % # % In State of Residence 11,770 99.0% 16,393 99.1% 23,197 99.1% 66,546 99.4% 17,904 99.2% In County of Residence 9,743 82.0% 11,363 68.7% 12,058 51.5% 48,986 73.2% 10,115 56.0% Outside County of Residence 2,027 17.1% 5,030 30.4% 11,139 47.6% 17,560 26.2% 7,789 43.2% Outside State of Residence 115 1.0% 141 0.9% 201 0.9% 397 0.6% 146 0.8% Means of Transportation to Work # % # % # % # % # % Car, Truck, or Van ‐ drove alone 9,733 81.9% 12,848 77.7% 19,010 81.2% 56,438 84.3% 14,678 81.3% Car, Truck, or Van ‐ carpooled 1,115 9.4% 1,649 10.0% 2,700 11.5% 6,334 9.5% 2,102 11.6% Public Transportation 90 0.8% 120 0.7% 79 0.3% 249 0.4% 22 0.1% Walked 265 2.2% 982 5.9% 462 2.0% 793 1.2% 263 1.5% Taxicab, motorcycle, bicycle, other 132 1.1% 297 1.8% 352 1.5% 745 1.1% 304 1.7% Worked at Home 550 4.6% 638 3.9% 795 3.4% 2,384 3.6% 681 3.8%
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-23 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis County Oceana Osceola Ottawa Workers 16 Years and Older 10,064 8,708 129,071 Location of Employment # % # % # % In State of Residence 9,975 99.1% 8,610 98.9% 127,942 99.1% In County of Residence 5,934 59.0% 4,967 57.0% 79,166 61.3% Outside County of Residence 4,041 40.2% 3,643 41.8% 48,776 37.8% Outside State of Residence 89 0.9% 98 1.1% 1,129 0.9% Means of Transportation to Work # % # % # % Car, Truck, or Van ‐ drove alone 7,534 74.9% 6,876 79.0% 107,961 83.6% Car, Truck, or Van ‐ carpooled 1,099 10.9% 944 10.8% 10,841 8.4% Public Transportation 15 0.1% 34 0.4% 1,201 0.9% Walked 290 2.9% 279 3.2% 3,050 2.4% Taxicab, motorcycle, bicycle, other 149 1.5% 197 2.3% 1,555 1.2% Worked at Home 977 9.7% 378 4.3% 4,463 3.5%
Source: American Community Survey, Five‐Year Estimates (2010‐2014), Table B08130.
Another source of data that provides an understanding of employee travel patterns is the Census Bureau’s Longitudinal Employer‐Household Dynamics (LEHD) dataset. Table 5‐6 provides the results of this analysis for the region. As the table shows, employment destinations are heavily dispersed throughout the region. The region’s largest city, Grand Rapids, ranked in the top five for over half of the region’s counties. Other top regional employment destinations include Holland, Kentwood, Muskegon, and Wyoming.
Table 5‐6: Top Five Employment Destinations for County Residents
Allegan County Barry County Ionia County Place # % Place # % Place # % Holland 1,686 4.8% Hastings 1,456 12.3% Ionia 1,104 5.0% Allegan 945 2.7% Middleville 323 2.7% Belding 646 3.0% Grand Rapids 696 2.0% Nashville 182 1.5% Portland 410 1.9% Wyoming 652 1.9% Grand Rapids 179 1.5% Grand Rapids 270 1.2% Otsego 603 1.7% Battle Creek 153 1.3% Lake Odessa 226 1.0% All Others 30,578 87.0% All Others 9,569 80.7% All Others 19,216 87.9% Kent County Lake County Mason County Place # % Place # % Place # % Grand Rapids 58,901 16.7% Baldwin 59 4.4% Ludington 1,898 20.2% Wyoming 24,664 7.0% Ludington 20 1.5% Scottville 278 3.0% Kentwood 17,430 4.9% Luther 19 1.4% Manistee 186 2.0% Forest Hills 8,776 2.5% Cadillac 17 1.3% Hart 62 0.7% Walker 8,230 2.3% Reed City 17 1.3% Pentwater 61 0.6% All Others 234,802 66.6% All Others 1,215 90.2% All Others 6,909 73.5%
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-24 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 5: Demographic Analysis Mecosta County Montcalm County Muskegon County Place # % Place # % Place # % Big Rapids 1,046 8.7% Greenville 1,156 7.6% Muskegon 5,748 10.6% Canadian Lakes 278 2.3% Belding 329 2.2% Norton Shores 5,305 9.8% Grand Rapids 213 1.8% Stanton 217 1.4% Muskegon Heights 1,207 2.2% Reed City 196 1.6% Edmore 190 1.2% Roosevelt Park 904 1.7% Mount Pleasant 93 0.8% Grand Rapids 140 0.9% Wolf Lake 891 1.7% All Others 10,226 84.8% All Others 13,220 86.7% All Others 39,928 74.0% Newaygo County Oceana County Osceola County Place # % Place # % Place # % Fremont 876 8.4% Hart 337 6.4% Reed City 260 5.3% Newaygo 285 2.7% Shelby 242 4.6% Evart 167 3.4% White Cloud 161 1.5% Pentwater 102 1.9% Big Rapids 107 2.2% Hesperia 109 1.0% Montague 82 1.6% Cadillac 70 1.4% Muskegon 109 1.0% Muskegon 64 1.2% Marion 43 0.9% All Others 8,861 85.2% All Others 4,426 84.3% All Others 4,260 86.8% Ottawa County Place # % Holland 8,056 7.1% Grand Rapids 5,044 4.5% Wyoming 3,132 2.8% Grand Haven 2,659 2.4% Jenison 2,285 2.0% All Others 91,690 81.2%
Source: Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin‐Destination Employment Statistics, 2013.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 5-25 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources Chapter 6 Current Transportation Services and Resources
INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a review of public transit, human services transportation, private transportation services, non‐motorized transportation services, and other transportation services provided in Region 4. The process to identify transportation resources available in the region included:
Using information from previous planning efforts (discussed in Chapter 3). Obtaining input from regional stakeholders through the coordinated mobility planning workshop. Reviewing reports produced by MDOT. Conducting on‐line research, including the 2‐1‐1 database, and appropriate information on current transportation services.
The review of current public transit services points out challenges with providing regional transit services. Since much of the funding for transit services in the region comes through local funding, public transit systems in the region are typically formed naturally around county boundaries. Similarly, a local millage can be secured to help fund local service formed around city and township boundaries.
PUBLIC TRANSIT
The 13 counties that make up Region 4 are served by 14 different transit systems including:
Allegan County Transportation Barry County Transit Belding Dial‐A‐Ride (Ionia County) Big Rapids Dial‐A‐Ride (Mecosta County) Greenville Transit (Montcalm County) Harbor Transit Multi‐Modal Transportation System (Ottawa County) Interurban Transit Partnership (RAPID) (Grand Rapids Metro Area) Ionia Dial‐A‐Ride (Ionia County) Ludington Mass Transportation Authority (Mason County) Macatawa Area Express (MAX) (Ottawa County) Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority (Mecosta and Osceola Counties) Muskegon Area Transit System (Muskegon Metro Area) Yates Dial‐A‐Ride (Lake County)
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-1 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
The following section provides an overview of each public transit system. A summary of public transit services in the region then follows, along with operating and performance data. Allegan County Transportation
Allegan County Transportation provides advanced notice demand response service for the county, Monday through Friday from 5:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Passengers must schedule their trip by 12:00 noon the day prior to travel. Vehicles are wheelchair lift equipped.
Fares are $2.00 per trip for adults and children age 13 and over. Seniors (age 60 and over), persons with disabilities, and children ages 5 to 12 may pay a reduced fare of $1.00. Children under 5 ride free with adult supervision. Out‐of‐county medical transportation is provided for seniors and persons with disabilities by special request to Calhoun, Kalamazoo, Kent, Ottawa, and Van Buren Counties.
Barry County Transit
Barry County Transit serves the entirety of Barry County through pre‐arranged transportation Monday through Saturday from 5:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. As of January 2016, Barry County Transit has expanded evening hours in select areas to 7:30 p.m. on weekdays. Service is provided to each village and burg Monday through Saturday with at least 24 hours advanced notice. Barry County Transit provides transportation for students within the city limits of Hastings where public school bus transportation is not provided. Free trolley circulator service is provided in Hastings and Middleville during the summer season. Barry County’s Med‐Van provides trips outside of the county at a per hour rate.
Fares for the general public are $2.00 per trip under 5 miles and $3.00 for trips over 5 miles. Children ages 1 to 4 may pay a $1.00 fare while infants may ride free. Seniors (ages 60 and over) and people with disabilities pay a discounted fare of $1.00 for trips under 5 miles and $1.50 for trips over 5 miles. Students within Hastings City Limits pay $1.00 per trip and are eligible for daily and monthly passes. Med‐Van transportation to destinations outside of Barry County is charged at a rate of $38.00 per hours.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-2 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Belding Dial-A-Ride
The City of Belding, in Ionia County, operates dial‐a‐ride service in the Belding area weekdays from 6:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and on Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Special service is available on weekdays between the Cities of Belding, Greenville, Ionia, and the Village of Orleans at specific times. Belding Dial‐A‐ Ride operates five wheelchair lift equipped buses for customers with special needs and allows those who use wheelchairs or are disabled to have a personal care aide travel with them at no cost. The cost of service within the Belding area is $2.50 per adult, $2.00 per student, and $1.25 per senior or person with disabilities. Children ages 3 or younger may ride free when accompanied by an adult.
Big Rapids Dial-A-Ride
The City of Big Rapids, in Mecosta County, provides dial‐a‐ride service within the city limits Monday through Friday from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. and Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.; 24 hour advanced notice is encouraged but not mandatory. Seven vehicles are equipped with wheelchair lifts, and drivers are trained to provide assistance when requested. Big Rapids Dial‐A‐Ride operates SAFE RIDE, a free service for anyone in the community who needs a ride home from local establishments on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights (12:00 a.m. to 2:30 a.m.). A dedicated university route is provided for Ferris University from August to May. The service arranges school transportation through parents where public school bus service is not available.
Fares are $2.00 per trip for adults, $1.00 per trip for ages 16 and under, and $1.00 for seniors and persons with disabilities. Ticket books are available for $20.00 for 10 adult rides or 20 rides for children, seniors, and persons with disabilities. Ticket books are on sale the first six business days of each month for $16.00.
Greenville Transit
The City of Greenville, located in Montcalm County, provides safe, affordable, and convenient public transportation with the city and to neighboring Eureka Township. Services are provided Monday through Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Trips must be scheduled at least 30 minutes in advance.
Fares for trips within Greenville are $3.50 per one‐way trip, children under age 12 pay $2.50, and the fare is $1.75 for seniors (ages 60 and over) and persons with disabilities. Trips between Greenville and surrounding Eureka Township are $4.20 per trip, $3.00 for children under age 12, and $2.10 seniors (age 60 and over) and persons with disabilities. Greenville Transit utilizes a token system. Tokens are available for purchase at City Hall and the Transit Garage.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-3 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Harbor Transit Multi-Modal Transportation System
Harbor Transit provides curb‐to‐curb service seven days a week from the Tri‐Cities region of northwestern Ottawa County. Jurisdictions served include the City of the Grand Haven, the Village of Spring Lake, the City of Ferrysburg, Grand Haven Township, and Spring Lake Township. Service is available Monday to Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Sunday service is available on a pre‐ arranged basis. Harbor Transit provides a summer trolley circulating the City of Grand Haven between Memorial Day and Labor Day. Trolley service runs seven days a week from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Fares for one‐way trips are $1.50 adults. A discounted fare of $0.75 is available for those ages 18 and under, those ages 60 and over, persons with disabilities, and those with a valid Medicare card. Toddlers and infants ages 4 and under ride free with a paying adult.
Interurban Transit Partnership (RAPID)
RAPID operates bus rapid transit (BRT), fixed routes, demand response service, and car and vanpooling programs in the greater Grand Rapids area. RAPID’s 28 routes cover much of the metro area including Grand Rapids, Wyoming, Comstock Park, Kentwood, East Grand Rapids, Cascade, Grand Rapids Charter Township, Walker, and a route to Ferris State University in Big Rapids. Service is provided from 5:00 a.m. to 12:15 a.m. Monday through Friday; 6:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Saturdays; and 8:15 a.m. to 6:45 p.m. on Sundays.
Fares are $1.75 per trip for adults, free for children under 42 inches tall, and $0.85 per trip for seniors (ages 65 and over) and persons with disabilities. Passes are available as 10 ride tickets, unlimited 31 day passes, unlimited seven day passes, and unlimited one day passes. Tickets and passes may be purchased online, on board buses, at RAPID Central Station, ticket vending machines, and at select retail outlets.
Ionia Dial-A-Ride
The Ionia Dial‐A‐Ride provides service within the city limits of Ionia and to the Townships of Berlin, Easton, Ionia, and Orange. Service is provided Monday through Friday from 6:30 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. and Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. Job access service is provided between Ionia and Muir.
Fares per one‐way trip are $3.00 for adults and $2.00 for children (K‐12). A discounted fare of $1.50 is available for pre‐kindergarten children, persons with disabilities, and seniors (ages 62 and over). Ionia Dial‐A‐Ride offers punch cards which are good for 10 one‐way trips. The cards offer a slight discount versus paying for individual one‐way trips and may be purchased at the Dial‐A‐Ride office or by at least 24 hours advanced notice to the driver.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-4 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Ludington Mass Transportation Authority
Ludington Mass Transportation Authority serves the Cities of Ludington and Scottville and Pere Marquette Charter Township in Mason County. The authority partners with West Michigan Community Health to provide demand response trips within the county where no other transportation service is available. Service is provided Monday through Friday 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., and Sunday 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
Macatawa Area Express (MAX)
MAX is the public transit system for Ottawa County’s Holland/Zeeland metropolitan area. Service is offered on eight routes Monday to Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Two routes offer limited twilight service around Holland from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. MAX offers a Bus Buddies program which pairs up experienced passengers or MAX employees with new passengers to help them feel more confident about riding the bus. MAX provides the QuikTrip Shuttle for Holland’s annual Tulip Time Festival. Reserve‐A‐Max demand response service provides advanced reservations for eligible passengers. All MAX buses are wheelchair lift equipped and provide bicycle racks.
Fare for MAX’s routes are $0.50 per trip with various passes ranging from a $2.00 day pass to a $30.00 monthly pass. Fares for Reserve‐A‐Max are $5.00 per trip or a discounted fare of $2.00 for ADA cardholders, seniors (over age 70), and children (ages 5‐17). Children under age 5 ride free with an adult.
Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority (MOTA)
MOTA provides countywide demand response transportation services in both Mecosta and Osceola Counties. MOTA’s service provides local, regional, statewide, and national connections. All of MOTA’s vehicles are wheelchair lift equipped. Service is provided Monday through Friday 5:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Requests for transportation must be made at least one hour before planned departure and 24 hour notice is recommended. MOTA’s Kwik Trips service provides trips with a one hour notice when the origin and destinations are in one of the six townships of Big Rapids, Mecosta, Green, Colfax, Austin, and Grant
Fares are $5.00 (one way) for adults and children ages 13 and up. Seniors, persons with disabilities, and children ages 5‐12 pay $2.50 per trip. Children under five ride free with an adult. Kwik Trips service provides trips at half of the cost of regular service.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-5 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Muskegon Area Transit System (MATS)
MATS is the primary provider of public transportation in Muskegon County operating nine urban routes and four regional or MARC routes. MATS’ paratransit service is known as GoBus. GoBus provides service to all of Muskegon County for seniors (ages 60 and over) and persons with disabilities. Service is provided Monday to Friday 6:30 a.m. to 10:40 p.m. and Saturday 9:30 a.m. to 5:40 p.m. Regional or MARC routes are only operated on weekdays. MATS’ Herman Ivory Transfer Terminal, located in downtown Muskegon, is the system’s main transfer point and serves as a stop for Greyhound buses.
Fares are $1.25 per trip with a discounted fare of $0.60 for seniors and persons with disabilities. A 10 ride ticket is available for $12.50 or a discounted rate of $6.00 (discounted for seniors and persons with disabilities).Monthly passes are available for $40.00 or discounted at $20.00 (for seniors and persons with disabilities). Fares for MARC Routes are $2.50 per trip ($1.25 discount for seniors and persons with disabilities) or 10 ride tickets for $25.00 and discounted at $12.50.
Yates Dial-A-Ride
Yates Dial‐A‐Ride is operated by Yates Township in Lake County. Service is provided to 16 townships within Lake County. Yates Dial‐A‐ Ride provides transportation to area human service agencies, senior centers, and essential transportation for residents with disabilities. Service is provided Monday through Friday 6:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and on Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Fares are $1.00 per trip for adults, $0.75 for seniors and students, and $2.00 for residents outside of contributing townships.
Regional Overview
Table 6‐1 provides a summary of public transit services in Region 4.
Table 6‐2 provides operating data and performance data for public transit services in the region. As indicated in this table, in 2014, public transit systems in Region 4:
Provided nearly 15 million passenger trips Travelled over 12.8 million miles Operated over 1.5 million revenue hours
Also indicated in Table 6‐2, funding for public transit services was provided through a variety of federal, state, and local funding, and passenger fares through the farebox. Overall as a region, more than 32% of funding was from the state and 40% was from local sources.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-6 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources Table 6‐1: Public Transit Services in Region 4
Regional System Service Type(s) Primary Service Area Service Hours Services/Connectivity Advanced Allegan County Reservation and Monday ‐ Friday Intra‐County with agreement Allegan County Transportation Limited Demand 5:30 a.m. ‐ 5:30 p.m. to serve Holland Response Demand Response & Monday ‐ Saturday Med‐Van provides out‐of‐ Barry County Transit Limited Trolley Barry County 5:30 a.m. ‐ 5:30 p.m. county transportation Service Monday ‐ Friday Service from Belding to 6:30 a.m. ‐ 6 p.m. Greenville, Ionia, and Village Belding Dial‐A‐Ride Demand Response City of Belding Saturday of Orleans available upon 9 a.m. ‐ 2 p.m. request Monday ‐ Friday Big Rapids Dial‐A‐ 6:30 a.m. ‐ 6:30 p.m. Intra‐City Demand Response City of Big Rapids Ride Saturday Service to Ferris University 9 a.m. ‐ 2 p.m. Monday ‐ Friday Intra‐City City of Greenville and 6 a.m. ‐ 6 p.m. Service links Greenville and Greenville Transit Demand Response Eureka Township Saturday surrounding Eureka 9 a.m. ‐ 5:30 p.m. Township Monday ‐ Friday Harbor Transit Cities of Ferrysburg and 6 a.m. ‐ 5:30 p.m. Demand Response & Multi‐Modal Grand Haven; Townships of Saturday Limited Trolley Links the Tri‐Cities Region Transportation Grand Haven and Spring 9 a.m. ‐ 3:39 p.m. Service System Lake; Village of Spring Lake Sundays Pre‐Arranged Only Monday ‐ Friday Links the Grand Rapids Metro Grand Rapids Metro Area 5 a.m. – 12:15 p.m. Area including large portions Bus Rapid Transit, Interurban Transit and surrounding Saturday of Kent County. Service also Fixed Route, Demand Partnership (RAPID) communities including Big 9 a.m. ‐ 11 p.m. extends to Mecosta, Response Rapids Sunday Montcalm, and Ottawa 9 a.m. ‐ 4 p.m. Counties.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-7 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Regional System Service Type(s) Primary Service Area Service Hours Services/Connectivity Monday ‐ Friday City of Ionia; Townships of 6:30 a.m. ‐ 5 p.m. Ionia Dial‐A‐Ride Demand Response Berlin, Easton, Ionia, and Intra‐County Saturday Orange; Village of Muir 9 a.m. ‐ 1 p.m. Monday ‐ Friday 6 a.m. ‐ 7 p.m. Ludington Mass Cities of Ludington and Saturday Transportation Demand Response Scottsville; Marquette Intra‐County 8 a.m. ‐ 4 p.m. Authority Charter Township Sunday 8 a.m. ‐ 2 p.m. Monday ‐ Friday Macatawa Area Fixed Route and 6 a.m. ‐ 7 p.m. Holland and Zeeland Intra‐County Express (MAX) Demand Response Saturday 8 a.m. ‐ 7 p.m. Connections between Monday ‐ Friday Mecosta and Osceola Mecosta Osceola Mecosta and Osceola 5:30 a.m. ‐ 6 p.m. Demand Response Counties including links to Transit Authority Counties Evening Service by Advanced other transit systems and Reservation Indian Trails Monday ‐ Friday Muskegon Area Fixed Route and 6:30 a.m. ‐ 10:40 p.m. Intra‐County with links to Muskegon County Transit System Demand Response Saturday Greyhound 9:30 a.m. ‐ 5:40 p.m. Monday ‐ Friday 6:30 a.m. ‐ 6 p.m. Yates Dial‐A‐Ride Demand Response Lake County Intra‐County Saturday 9 a.m. ‐ 4 p.m.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-8 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources Table 6‐2: Public Transit Operating and Performance Data – 2014
Total Total Total Federal State Local Farebox Provider Eligible Total Miles Vehicle Passengers Revenues Revenues Revenues Revenues Expenses Hours Allegan County 40,569 $1,094,503 525,809 20,972 $166,344 $430,140 $1,034 $632,370 Transportation Barry County Transit 94,282 $1,232,769 356,290 21,408 $191,268 $484,478 $508,770 $217,235 Belding Dial‐A‐Ride 30,754 $230,438 78,105 5,375 $48,939 $152,323 $80,082 $35,968 Big Rapids Dial‐A‐Ride 150,721 $559,179 136,120 11,867 $84,106 $219,757 $84,480 $203,717 Greenville Transit 32,499 $310,199 85,812 8,531 $49,633 $121,908 $55,582 $64,700 Harbor Transit Multi‐ Modal Transportation 189,577 $2,148,368 509,325 34,780 $710,010 $844,309 $837,233 $203,462 System Interurban Transit 12,588,446 $40,572,312 8,316,749 1,197,425 $685,842 $12,206,354 $20,682,509 $6,790,747 Partnership (RAPID) Ionia Dial‐A‐Ride 49,970 $416,666 95,289 8,063 $69,367 $191,295 $111,327 $132,025 Ludington Mass Transportation 193,864 $1,763,059 413,402 33,269 $265,671 $692,882 $372,644 $464,182 Authority Macatawa Area Express 479,398 $3,686,691 827,798 71,503 $1,200,000 $1,448,870 $928,806 $341,278 (MAX) Mecosta Osceola 60,828 $744,171 272,701 11,876 $114,529 $316,429 $3,079 $301,993 Transit Authority Muskegon Area Transit 708,461 $3,197,365 766,149 55,162 $2,087,585 $1,136,783 $197,435 $509,497 System Yates Dial‐A‐Ride 197,396 $1,542,177 459,878 29,508 $279,877 $629,769 $216,948 $650,441 Region Total 14,816,765 $57,497,897 12,843,427 1,509,739 5,953,171 18,875,297 24,079,929 10,547,615 Sources: MDOT: Michigan Public Transit Facts
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-9 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
NON-PROFIT AND HUMAN SERVICE TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS
This section provides an overview of non‐profit and human service transportation providers identified in the region. Transportation services are specialized in nature, and typically provided only to agency clients for specific trip purpose, generally either medical or to access agency locations. These services may be modified due to funding or other changes.
Allegan County
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Area Community Services Employment and Training Council (ACSET) provides transportation service in Allegan, Barry, and Kent Counties for medical purposes only.
Allegan Commission on Aging provides service to Allegan County seniors ages 60 and over. Services include hot home‐delivered meals, volunteer transportation, personal care, homemaking, in‐home respite, outreach and assistance, and adult day care services.
Association for Driver Rehabilitation Specialists (ADED) supports professionals working in the field of driver education/driver training and transportation equipment modifications for persons with disabilities through education and information dissemination. ADED, a non‐ profit organization is the primary professional organization in this specialized area, and stands ready to meet the professional needs of its members through educational conferences and research support as well as encouraging equipment development to maximize the transportation options for persons with disabilities.
Allegan County Resource Development Committee provides volunteer drivers to transport seniors to and from appointments in order of priority for medical, legal, nutritional, or social purposes. Volunteer drivers are able to drive seniors to out‐of‐county medical appointments when necessary and provide door‐to‐door service. Notice must be given at least 48 hours in advance. Barry County
American Red Cross of West Central Michigan offers limited transportation services in Barry, Kent, and Muskegon Counties. Transportation is reserved for individuals in need, specifically dialysis patients, veterans needing trips to the Battle Creek VAMC, and other medical treatment. All services are demand response and trips are provided Monday to Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Area Community Services Employment and Training Council (ACSET) provides transportation service in Allegan, Barry, and Kent Counties for medical purposes only.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-10 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Ionia County
Ionia County Commission on Aging provides information and services to citizens within its geographical area who are ages 60 older. They offer services such as medical transportation, nutrition programs, home delivered meals, health and wellness programs, in‐home assistance services and supportive services.
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy, and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Kent County
American Red Cross of West Central Michigan offers limited transportation services in Barry, Kent, and Muskegon Counties. Transportation is reserved for individuals in need, specifically dialysis patients, veterans needing trips to the Battle Creek VAMC, and other medical treatment. All services are demand response and trips are provided Monday to Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
AngelCare Home Health Care is dedicated to assisting the elderly and persons with physical disabilities through a full range of assistant services including transportation.
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy, and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Area Community Services Employment and Training Council (ACSET) provides transportation service in Allegan, Barry, and Kent Counties for medical purposes only.
Care Resources is a long‐term health care provider that enables elderly adults to live at home for as long as possible. In addition to home and day care services the organization provides transportation within Kent County.
Homewatch CareGivers specializes in dementia and Alzheimer’s care offering a full range of services including transportation for basic errands.
Hope Network, Inc. provides transportation services in Kent County.
Right at Home, In Home Care and Assistance provides home health care services including companionship, light housekeeping, shopping and transportation assistance, and many other services.
Senior Neighbors provides transportation services in Kent County in partnership with RideLink, a part of special services of RAPID. Service is provided for seniors ages 60 and over. Trips must be scheduled in advanced and be between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 4:40 p.m.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-11 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
United Methodist Community House offers transportation in Grand Rapids. This service is a component of RAPID’s RideLink program. Hours of operation are 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Lake County
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy, and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Mason County
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy, and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Quinn’s Car Rental of Ludington offers discounted vehicle rentals.
Mecosta County
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy, and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Mecosta County Commission on Aging provides transportation for medical needs when the need cannot be met by other transportation providers. Trips commonly are need to access specialists outside of Mecosta County mainly including specialists and dialysis in Kent County. Transportation is coordinated with Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority to refer individuals to transportation outside of Mecosta County. Transportation is available Monday to Friday 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Montcalm County
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy, and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Montcalm Commission on the Aging provides services to citizens ages 60 and older. Volunteer drivers donate time to provide rides to medical appointments. Three days’ notice is needed to allow time for scheduling. There is no charge for this service; however, donations are accepted. Hours of operation are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday with some exceptions based on need.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-12 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Muskegon County
American Red Cross of West Central Michigan offers limited transportation services in Barry, Kent, and Muskegon Counties. Transportation is reserved for individuals in need, specifically dialysis patients, veterans needing trips to Battle Creek VAMC, and other medical treatment. All services are demand response and trips are provided Monday to Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Goodwill Industries of West Michigan provides flexible schedule transportation services to meet the needs of individuals involved in Goodwill activities. Program hours are 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Other programs may be available during off hours. There is a program set up to assist individuals with obtaining a bus pass.
Pioneer Resources offers services for people with mobility impairments, developmental disabilities, senior citizens and others facing transportation barriers. Services are provided along the lakeshore in western Michigan (Ottawa and Muskegon Counties). Pioneer Resources can assist eligible passengers or organizations with field trips and special events.
Senior Resource is a regional planning, advocacy and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services in specified geographic regions of the state.
Newaygo County
Newaygo County Five Cap. Inc. provides information and referral services for seniors and the poor, including housing and emergency services.
Newaygo County Commission on Aging provides basic access services to seniors and handicapped persons in Newaygo County using five buses (four used regularly and one backup). All vehicles are wheelchair lift equipped. The commission utilizes a volunteer driver network for out‐of‐county travel when health services are not available within the county. Transportation is provided from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday with exceptions for critical needs.
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy, and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Oceana County
Oceana County Area Bus, operated by Gene’s Ventures provides local bus service providing medical, shopping, or day trips around the Ludington area.
Oceana County Council on Aging provides bi‐monthly shopping trips to Mason and Muskegon Counties and volunteer based transportation for medical appointments for seniors ages 60 and over. Transportation operates 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-13 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Senior Resource is a regional planning, advocacy and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services in specified geographic regions of the state.
Osceola County
Area Agency on Aging of Western Michigan, Inc. is a regional planning, advocacy, and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services to seniors in specified geographic regions of the state.
Ottawa County
Georgetown Seniors, Inc. provides transportation for residents of Georgetown Township to destinations in Grand Rapids, Holland, Zeeland, Wyoming, and Hudsonville. Connections are provided to RAPID. Service is provided Monday to Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Pioneer Resources offers services for people with mobility impairments, developmental disabilities, senior citizens and others facing transportation barriers. Services are provided along the lakeshore in western Michigan (Ottawa and Muskegon Counties). Pioneer Resources can assist eligible passengers or organizations with field trips and special events.
Senior Resource is a regional planning, advocacy and administrative agency that plans and provides needed services in specified geographic regions of the state.
PRIVATE TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS
Intercity Bus Services
There are a variety of intercity private transportation routes serving Region 4. Routes consist of interstate and intrastate connections from:
Greyhound Lines Indian Trails
Taxi / Shuttle Providers
Using the website, www.switchboard.com, and other on‐line research, the following taxi and shuttle providers were identified in the region:
All City Cab – Mecosta County Applause Limousine LLC – Ottawa County Blue City Transportation & Taxi – Muskegon County Busy Bee – Muskegon County
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-14 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 6: Current Transportation Services and Resources
Calder City Taxi – Kent County Classic Macatawa Taxi – Ottawa County Davis Blaine – Kent County Driving Team LLP – Kent County Great Lakes Taxi – Kent County Metro Cars – Kent County Midtown Sedan – Kent County Moon Light Taxi – Muskegon County Muskegon County Personal Taxi – Muskegon County Port City Cab – Muskegon County Rich’s Taxi Service Rosebud Taxi Service – Ottawa County Saugatuck Douglas Car Service – Allegan County Town & Country Taxicab and Delivery Services LLC – Manistee, Mason, and Oceana Counties United Taxi – Kent County University Taxi – Ottawa County Veterans & Yellow Cab – Kent County Yellow Cab – Muskegon County
NON-EMERGENCY MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION
Individuals in need of NEMT in Region 4 rely upon a variety of transportation resources to access medical appointments. These resources involve the use of family and friends, volunteer drivers, public sector transportation (bus service), private sector transportation (taxis, private NEMT companies, private duty health services, intercity bus service), and walking or biking.
The need for mobility management practices, such as centralized information and referral, brokerage service for reservation of rides, cost/revenue allocation, coordinated marketing of services, and shared Intelligent Transportation Systems were noted in the regional transit mobility report and considered in development of strategies discussed in the next chapter of this plan.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 6-15 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies Chapter 7 Prioritized Strategies
INTRODUCTION
This document discusses potential strategies, activities and projects for consideration by regional stakeholders. Efforts addressed in the strategies can help to fill identified gaps between current transportation services and unmet needs, expand regional mobility and achieve greater efficiencies in service delivery. The decisions made and priorities selected in response to this document will guide the planning process.
Development of possible strategies, activities, and projects took into account the following:
Input from regional stakeholders during the September 2015 workshop as expressed in the technical memorandum that reviewed needs.
Strategies identified in reports produced by regional planning agencies: West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission and West Michigan Regional Planning Commission.
Recommendations included in county or transit coordinated plans and other recent plans and studies.
After review by regional planners, potential strategies, activities and projects were distributed to regional study stakeholders for acceptance or rejection. Once accepted, strategies were prioritized (low, medium and high), for inclusion in the plan. Subsequently, an action plan identifying priorities for implementation and next steps based was developed by the consultants for inclusion in the mobility plan for the region.
The development of potential strategies, activities and projects took into account overall goals for maintaining and improving mobility in the region. While many are inter‐related, for consideration by regional stakeholders, the proposed strategies, activities, and projects are grouped by these goals.
Unique Features of West Michigan
Region 4 is the second largest region in the state, with two sub‐regions and 13 counties. Needs within the region are diverse and often quite different in many respects:
The Northern Sub‐region consists of smaller cities and many rural areas. The Southern Sub‐region consists of the larger cities of Muskegon and Grand Rapids.
This effort will attempt to balance differences between urban areas and rural communities into one regional plan.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-1 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
HIGH PRIORITY GOALS
Goal 1: Regional Connectivity
The strategies associated with this goal are each a step toward full regional connectivity for the purposes of commuting, medical needs, basic necessities, personal business, shopping and recreation.
Strategy 1-1: Identify and Prioritize Connectivity Needs
Most transit systems in the region do not connect with each other and few operate service beyond their jurisdiction. During the regional workshop, stakeholders noted the need for expanded regional transit services that cross jurisdictional lines. The first step in improving services is to identify and prioritize strategies.
Connectivity between jurisdictions is one of the greatest needs. There is a need for greater clarity and revision of rules for connecting jurisdictions (This is addressed in Strategy 5‐3). Rules should be set that would allow unrestricted transport of passengers to their destination as needed. There is no need to subject customers to multiple transfers.
There were a number of priority areas noted for increased regional connectivity:
Identify regional needs and prioritize: o Little service beyond cities and towns o Provide transit beyond the service area for - commuter service to larger employment centers and major cities in and adjacent to the region - transportation for specialized medical services in the region and to the adjacent region o Target unique veterans’ destinations (typically medical services) o Need for vanpooling and promotion of ridesharing
Strategy 1-2: Work with Community Leaders to Plan, Prioritize and Seek Funding
Major barriers to regional connectivity in Western Michigan are lack of funding and lack of political will/support to address needs beyond jurisdictional lines. Connectivity improvements can include the following steps and it is best to be prepared with fully planned projects as they will have a greater likelihood of being funded:
Agreements –Transit systems in the area should reach agreement on seeking opportunities to connect services where feasible and to ensure that all systems can operate inter‐county service into another city’s core service area.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-2 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
Prioritize services ‐ Service should be prioritized by location and type. More scheduled service should be established across the region beyond jurisdictional boundaries. This must be done at the local level.
Determine responsible entity(s) – Responsible entities can be a consortium of operators, a new regional transit system or one designated transit operator with support from other participating systems.
Funding – Once service(s) has been determined, it will be time to secure funding from local, state, federal and private sector funding and sponsorships sources.
This is discussed in detail in the section on outreach, marketing and education and funding.
Strategy 1-3: Initiate Efforts to Plan and Implement New Regional Services
There are a variety of approaches that can be used to build regional/intercity service. In selecting strategies, service design should be considered and an operator should be selected. State support would be needed for this option.
Daytime regional intercity service –Efforts should include seeking state support for regional intercity bus service during the day time. Stakeholders recommended added service between Ludington, Muskegon and Grand Rapids, with local feeder service available. The second component of this is service between Grand Rapids, Big Rapids and Reed City is currently operated by Indian Trails, but not during times that allow for same day return service. The study team should work with Indian Trails and MDOT to revise or supplement service to allow for at least 4 – 5 hours in Grand Rapids. o Ideally an early morning, mid‐day and/or evening round trip would allow for commuters and medical trips, however most corridors could not support that level of service. o Service should go directly to major destinations (medical and commuter) in each city and also connect at the main transfer center in each city.
Service operator – There are a variety of approaches that can be used to operate the service: o Use existing Indian Trails contractor o Develop a consortium of operators to provide service in a regional corridor o Designate one existing transit system to provide the service o Form a new transit system to operate regional service
Stakeholders should work to prioritize these strategies for formal inclusion in the plan.
Goal 2: Maintain Existing Transportation Services
It was clear from the review of the plans and discussions with stakeholders that the highest priorities will include strategies designed to ensure that existing services, public as well as human services, are
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-3 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
maintained as appropriate to ensure the best combination of efficiency (doing things right) and effectiveness (doing the right things). These initial strategies reflect the desire to maintain services.
Strategy 2-1: Continue to Support Services that Efficiently and Effectively Meet Transportation Needs
Maintaining the current level of service is an essential first step to meeting community transportation needs. This is a blanket strategy across the region. Financial resources should be maintained to operate vehicles and continue services at the current level. This strategy involves providing operating funds to support existing public transit services and human services transportation that are efficiently and effectively meeting mobility needs identified in the region, especially those serving older adults, individuals with disabilities and veterans.
Measuring Effectiveness
This strategy should be coupled with an evaluation of public transit services to ensure that services are worthy of financial resources to ensure that the greatest number of needs are met. These planning efforts are conducted every five to six years. Ongoing assessments assure that the public transit system is responding to possible changing demographics in their communities and operating service that is most effective and economical. This service planning process should be supplemented with input through appropriate rider, employer and public surveys; feedback from various stakeholders agencies and organizations; and input from staff, drivers and dispatchers on the frontline of services. A resource that can assist with this effort and was a follow‐up to a statewide training on providing cost effective transit services, is available at: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/TransitServicePlanningGuideAndResourcesForMDOT_40 9438_7.pdf
Transportation provided through human service agencies should use the same basic principles and measures modified as appropriate. There are tools available that agencies can use to evaluate their transportation programs and ensure that financial resources are being used effectively. An example would be Easter Seals Project Action’s Transportation by the Numbers tool which provides human service organizations with ways to more easily identify expenses, revenues and performance outcomes so that agencies can make more informed decisions about their future in the transportation business.
Strategy 2-2: Continue to Support Capital Needs
Most important in this area is to ensure that the number of vehicles is adequate to maintain current services and ensure that those vehicles are safe and appropriate for the need. Equally important is the maintenance and support required to ensure facilities are kept in appropriate working order. Maintaining and building upon current capital is crucial to expanding mobility options, especially for older adults, people with disabilities, veterans and people with lower incomes. Before the region can consider efforts for improving mobility for these population groups, it is critical to ensure that the current foundation of services and facilities remains in place through a sufficient capital network.
This strategy includes maintenance of existing technologies such as paratransit software, automatic vehicle locators and other technology. It includes acquisition of replacement buses or vans, vehicle
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-4 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies rehabilitation or overhaul, and appropriate vehicle equipment improvements that support the current capital infrastructure in the region. It also includes procurement of technology such as software, automatic vehicle locators, tablets and other features and preventative maintenance when appropriate as an eligible capital expense. With limited capital funding to replace buses, it is essential that current vehicles are maintained and remain safe and operable beyond the typical useful life criteria.
Goal 3: Expand and Improve Local Transit Services
Transit systems in Michigan often have limited service areas due to a variety of local political and millage issues. These issues often prevent transit systems from serving an entire county or providing basic out of area medical or commuter services. Understanding these institutional barriers is crucial to developing strategies that have the potential to expand service.
A number of areas were recognized in the plans and the meeting as having needs beyond current availability of services. Much of this was supported by the outreach process and collaboration of regional planners. While it is understood that funding is often required for these services to be implemented, that is not always the case.
The expansion of service strategies will require funding and support. This series of strategies will be directly tied to strategies related to funding, education/outreach and coordination. Those strategies will have to be implemented before most expansion strategies can be employed. Strategies are both general when addressing most or all of the region and specific where detailed needs have been identified. Strategies include the following:
Strategy 3-1: Expand Coordinated Service
Coordination allows for possibilities of service expansion for little additional costs. This is particularly true when vehicles dedicated to one user group have space available for other riders. By sharing services there are cost saving for all.
Medical trips ‐ Certain grant programs may allow funding for specific eligible population groups, which has discouraged the grouping of trips even when non eligible going to the same out of area destination. Coordination of services would allow non Medicaid riders to share the service at a lower cost for all. For example, a van going from Newaygo County to Muskegon for regularly scheduled NEMT needs can be opened to the public.
Commuters – There is a need for transportation to large employment centers both within and across service area lines. These could be commuter buses, vanpools and ridesharing. Vanpool and rideshare options are very inexpensive. Coordination between transit operators can also benefit commuters.
Expand Kent County Ridelink – There is a need to expand RideLink beyond just service for individuals 60 years of age or older.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-5 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
Strategy 3-2: Expand Service Hours
Typically riders desire service later in the evening. To meet commuter needs:
Expand accessible services – This strategy includes examining the possibility of expansion of wheelchair accessible services after hours (encouraging or subsidizing accessible taxis).
Hours of service ‐ This strategy calls for public transit to operate a minimum of 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. to meet basic commuter needs. Service until 10:30 p.m. would benefit service areas with a high level of service related businesses.
Strategy 3-3: Expand Origins and Destinations - Local
Typical destinations – This strategy calls for addressing gaps in origins and destinations including out of service area destinations. These destinations may be outside the service area but are typically where local residents go for specific goods, services, work, school and other destinations both within their county and in adjacent counties.
Develop public transit in the following areas: o Newaygo County o Oceana o This effort includes development of a plan, securing funding and implementing service.
Expand county‐wide service in the following areas: o Mason o Montcalm o Muskegon o Ionia o Kent o These efforts should include a plan, securing funding and implementing service.
Expand existing services in the following areas: o Allegan o Barry o Lake o Mecosta o Osceola o Ottawa
These efforts should include a plan, securing of funding and implementing service.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-6 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
Service Designs
New or modified services can use a variety of designs employed to improve service at a low cost. The key is to employ the best service design for any given area in order to group trips in the most effective way to lower the cost per trip and thereby make this service as cost effective as possible.
Seek most appropriate service design ‐ Where appropriate (most typically in rural areas), operators should seek to employ the least expensive options that can meet local needs. These include fixed schedule services, fixed/flex route service and dial‐a‐ride services. Studies indicated that under the right conditions, one fixed route bus can eliminate the need for up to three paratransit vehicles.
Establish fixed schedule service in rural areas – Fixed schedule service sets specific schedules for when the vehicle is going to be in or going to a particular community (usually a larger city where medical and shopping services are located). This may be daily, weekly or monthly service depending on the level of demand. Passengers can be picked up at the door, an intersection or a designated bus stop according to the posted schedule.
Match service to needs – Strategies should be set up to address major shift times at correctional facilities, retail and major employment centers.
System upgrade – Strategies should be set up to seek ways to attract new/choice riders: o More direct services for commuters o Place Wi‐Fi on vehicles o Image change of marketing plans and activities
Implement vanpools and ridesharing ‐ Vanpools have an excellent chance of success in targeted markets and can be managed and operated at a low cost. Transit can manage this effort and market services with major employers. Efforts would include promotion and marketing with employers and employees, identifying potential riders and securing and monitoring the vehicle and its use.
Goal 4: Secure Additional Funding to Provide Expanded Transportation Services
One of the key obstacles the transportation industry faces is how to pay for additional services. In Michigan this problem is compounded by the need to address millage in each township. These strategies rely on a combination of public (federal, state and local) funds as well as private sector sponsorships.
Strategy 4-1: Seek Grant Opportunities
Transit systems must continually seek grant opportunities in order to survive. While Federal Transit Administration (FTA) public transit funding is limited, FTA regularly has funding available for targeted needs. For example, last year’s Ladders of Opportunity grants provided significant funding for
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-7 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
commuter services. Funding is often available for capital and technology. The key to this strategy is to seek grant opportunities in a coordinated manner whereby multiple systems develop a consortium of providers for regional grant opportunities. While most available funds are federal (and typically FTA) funds, there are other opportunities from the private sector.
Strategy 4-2: Develop Sponsorships/Partnerships and Identify New Public and Private Opportunities
This strategy would involve identifying sponsorship opportunities to leverage additional funding to support public transit and human services transportation in the region. This would include meeting multiple unmet needs and issues by tackling non‐traditional sources of funding. Big box retailers, hospitals, supermarkets, and retailers who want the business of the region’s riders may be willing to pay to become system sponsors. Sponsors may want to advertise on buses. As sponsors they can benefit from excellent advertising opportunities and promotional benefits similar to sponsorships in other industries. Sponsors can support their customers. Sponsorships can be at any level and size business, from Walmart to a local restaurant.
Strategy 4-3: Advocate for Additional Funding
Coupled with the need to develop additional partnerships is a stronger advocacy campaign that highlights the impact that public transportation and human services transportation has on residents of the region and how it is a vital component of the community transportation infrastructure. This strategy involves a regional and unified effort to inform elected officials, local and national decision makers, and the general public on the need for additional funding to support needed services.
This advocacy campaign could be part of a statewide (state associations) movement to stress the importance of community and public transit funding at the state and national levels. State level education efforts should be on‐going using the two state associations where appropriate.
Continue seeking millage
Generate interest from the private sector o Providing service o Sponsorships and advertising
Identify funding needs for regional services
Stress need for diversity of funding
Strategy 4-4: Work with Medicaid to Seek Transit Solutions
Efforts should continue to be directed toward the state NEMT (Medicaid) program to seek a professional transit solution to NEMT’s transit issues. Combining NEMT and public transit would
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-8 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies benefit transit, Medicaid clients and the general public. In particular it would improve the availability of out of area trips for general public medical needs. Continued fragmentation results in a duplication of efforts.
LOW PRIORITY GOALS
Goal 5: Improve Coordination of Public, Private and Human Services Transportation
While coordinating transit services is intuitively the best option in virtually all human service programs that require transportation, it is not used frequently. It should be noted that the vast majority of human service funding that can be used by transit is through the Medicaid NEMT program. The ability to reduce costs through productivity gains while maintaining a safe and quality service should be applied by human service agencies to ensure proper training, driver screening, maintenance and efforts required for safe service.
These strategies should be coordinated closely with state associations as one is actively working to bring Medicaid NEMT back to transit.
Strategy 5-1: Improve Coordination of Services among Providers
Beyond the need to improve transit connectivity in the region is the need to review and discuss coordination efforts that include human services and private transportation services. This is particularly true in rural areas where there is often no public transit service available. This strategy calls for greater coordination of services and financial resources in an effort to use available funding as effectively as possible. Demand for public and human services transportation in the region will continue to exceed resources, so it is vital that wheelchair accessible vans in the community are fully utilized, long distance trips that travel through multiple counties in the region are consolidated when possible and training and vehicle maintenance is coordinated. Mobility management activities, tailored specifically to meet the region’s needs, can be implemented.
Coordinate NEMT services – Currently transit has a minor role in Medicaid NEMT services across the region. In many cases HMOs are providing transportation and the case needs to be made to these organization that the safest and least expensive appropriate mode is often transit. Coordinating public and human service transportation can expand service for all. For example, a regular NEMT trip from a remote area can be placed on the public transit schedule and public riders can ride according to the NEMT schedule, reducing costs for all riders. Transit should seek to become the regional broker or find a way to work with the existing broker in a mutually beneficial manner.
Target veteran’s needs – The best transit service for veterans is excellent public transit. Transit dependent veterans have the same transportation needs as most other persons in need. Efforts should be made to ensure significant destinations unique to veterans are served by transit.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-9 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
Establish ridesharing program for long distance medical trips ‐ Regional stakeholders expressed need for transportation that serves long‐distance medical trips, particularly for people who are not eligible for Medicaid funded transportation. This strategy uses a commuter‐oriented model as a basis for developing a ride‐sharing program for long distance medical trips. A database of potential drivers and riders could be kept with a central “mobility manager,” who would match trip needs with available participating drivers. Riders would share expenses with drivers on a per‐mile basis (i.e., similar to mileage reimbursement). This strategy could be a cost‐effective way to provide long‐distance medical trips without sending a human service or public transit vehicle out of the region for a day.
Strategy 5-2: Develop Mentoring Program between Transit Systems and Human Service Transportation Systems
Mentoring programs are a form of coordination where the human service agency operates its own vehicles and transit helps to ensure safe, dependable and quality transportation even when transit is not operating the service. This can work between larger and smaller transit systems. In these scenarios transit systems are typically mentors and human service agencies are mentored. Mentors can offer driver and dispatcher training, maintenance support, insurance and other operating support or advice without the “institutional” threat of consolidation.
Goal 6: Improve and Expand Outreach, Marketing and Education
These strategies call for spreading the messages that transit can meet your needs and that transit is a vital aspect of community life. It is essential that these strategies be employed at the local level. Systems that do not adhere to these strategies may become irrelevant in their communities.
Strategy 6-1: Establish or Expand Programs That Educate a Broad Spectrum of Leaders, Stakeholders and Customers on the Need and Value that Transit Produces
Transit services often struggle to maintain relevance in their community and this begins with local and state leaders. This leadership is manifested in a number of ways:
Business leaders – Many businesses, large and small, understand the need for transit in their community.
Community leaders – Community leaders must step up to support transit.
Political leaders –It is very important for political leaders to understand the importance and to support efforts to fund service and eliminate restrictions on service destinations.
Human service leaders – Human service leaders need to be able to work with the system, and trust and contract with the professional transit systems.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-10 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
Veteran leaders – Veterans are an important component of the transit dependent population. Coordinating public transit for all, benefits veterans.
Transit systems can do some of the education on their own, but with support from the state transit associations they can work together to hone their message and their materials to provide a higher quality education program. This strategy calls for transit systems to perform their marketing and education as a consortium to enhance their message.
Strategy 5-2: Establish or Expand Programs that Educate Customers and Stakeholder on Availability and Use of Transit
It is vital that customers, caseworkers, agency staff, and medical facility personnel that work with older adults, people with disabilities and people with low incomes are familiar are confident in available transportation services. Regional stakeholders expressed need for expanded marketing of existing transportation services and education of residents in the region on their travel options.
This strategy involves expanded outreach programs to ensure people helping others with their transportation issues are aware of mobility options in the region. Additional efforts include travel training programs to help individuals use available public transit services.
Transit systems that do not have in‐house marketing expertise should work together and with state associations to develop a program and materials to ensure the message gets out in a clear, concise manner.
Availability of services – Lack of understanding of available services and how to access them is a major impediment to riding. Efforts should be made to employ grass roots efforts to educate the public on services available.
Develop materials – Grass roots approaches work best for small systems. Most materials needed for education can be produced using a copier and displayed across the service area. Free ads and promotional spots can also help.
Improve perception – Most rural and small urban transit systems (with notable exceptions) struggle to maintain a public identity. Many residents and visitors believe service is for elderly persons only.
Motivate the public – Strategies must include approaches to generate ridership among youth. Wi‐Fi, late night service, and partnering with entertainment establishments and colleges can serve to attract youths to the service.
Strategy 5-3: Clarity Related to Crossing Jurisdictional Lines
There continues to be confusion among transit operators as to the rules (or lack thereof) related to crossing jurisdictional lines. This strategy calls for a forum/workshop with Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) and transit operators to provide clarity to rules at the state level.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-11 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 7: Prioritized Strategies
Each transit system should discuss its local jurisdictional rules and requirements to ensure that its residents receive the service they need even if it is in an adjacent jurisdiction or major city. This is most important for commuters and specialized medical needs.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 7-12 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 8: Ongoing Arrangements Chapter 8 Ongoing Arrangements
During the regional workshop stakeholders noted the need for expanded regional transit services that cross county lines. They noted that providing cross‐county transportation can be challenging, and there is a need to determine barriers and work through the invisible boundaries of county lines to provide expanded regional services.
While this plan serves as the foundation for improved regional services, it is evident that more detailed discussions are needed. It would require a more formal structure to lead these efforts; a structure that would assess regional transit opportunities, identify possible service improvements and gain consensus on implementation of services (i.e. who would operate, how costs and how funding would be allocated).
This plan recommends the formation of a regional coordinating committee that would include a broader group of representatives and provide an ongoing forum for members to:
Discuss improved connections between existing transit providers. While there is some connectivity between systems in the region additional connections can be discussed and implemented as appropriate.
Consider, plan, and implement cross county services. While some jurisdictions in the region are working together to implement services that transport customers across county lines or enable transfers between services, regional stakeholders noted the need for additional cross county services that meet rural community demands and support economic development.
Assess barriers to regional services (i.e. county millages that support local transit services but not services that operate out of the county) and identify incentives and/or funding opportunities to provide regional transit services.
Review and discuss strategies for coordinating transit services with other regions in Michigan to help expand mobility options.
Lead updates of this coordinated mobility plan for Region 4.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 8-1 Prosperity Region 4
Chapter 9: Adoption Process Chapter 9 Adoption Process
As discussed in Chapter 1, this coordinated mobility plan is designed to meet federal coordinated transportation planning requirements. The guidance in these requirements state that the lead agency in consultation with planning participants should identify the process for approving and adopting the plan.
The consensus in Region 4 was that stakeholders who participated in the development of this plan, and who had the opportunity to provide input and review interim portions, would serve in the adoption capacity. Through the course of the planning process these regional stakeholders had the opportunity to:
Review and comment on identified transportation needs in the region.
Review and provide input on potential strategies, activities, and projects to be included in the regional plan.
Prioritize strategies identified as the most appropriate for improving mobility in the region.
Review and provide input on the draft version of this plan.
Approve a final version of this plan.
Coordinated Mobility Plan 9-1 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
Appendix A: Coordinated Planning Guidance
Coordinated Mobility Plan Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
COORDINATED PLANNING
1. The Coordinated Public Transit – Human Services Transportation Plan
Federal transit law, as amended by MAP‐21, requires that projects selected for funding under the Section 5310 program be “included in a locally developed, coordinated public transit‐ human services transportation plan” and that the plan be “developed and approved through a process that included participation by seniors, individuals with disabilities, representatives of public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human services providers and other members of the public.” The experiences gained from the efforts of the Federal Interagency Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (CCAM), and specifically the United We Ride (UWR) initiative, provide a useful starting point for the development and implementation of the local public transit‐human services transportation plan required under the Section 5310 program.
Many states have established UWR plans that may form a foundation for a coordinated plan that includes the required elements outlined in this chapter and meets the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5310. In addition, many states and designated recipients may have coordinated plans established under SAFETEA‐LU, and those plans may be updated to account for new stakeholders, eligibility, and MAP‐21 requirements. FTA maintains flexibility in how projects appear in the coordination plan. Projects may be identified as strategies, activities, and/or specific projects addressing an identified service gap or transportation coordination objective articulated and prioritized within the plan.
2. Development of the Coordinated Public Transit - Human Services Transportation Plan
Overview
A locally developed, coordinated public transit‐human services transportation plan (“coordinated plan”) identifies the transportation needs of individuals with disabilities, seniors, and people with low incomes; provides strategies for meeting those local needs; and prioritizes transportation services and projects for funding and implementation. Local plans may be developed on a local, regional, or statewide level. The decision as to the boundaries of the local planning areas should be made in consultation with the state, designated recipient, and the MPO, where applicable. The agency leading the planning process is decided locally and does not have to be the state or designated recipient.
In UZAs where there are multiple designated recipients, there may be multiple plans and each designated recipient will be responsible for the selection of projects in the designated recipient’s area. A coordinated plan should maximize the programs’ collective coverage by minimizing duplication of services. Further, a coordinated plan must be developed through a process that includes participation by seniors, individuals with disabilities, representatives of public, private and nonprofit transportation and human service transportation providers, and other members of the public. While the plan is only required in communities seeking funding under the Section 5310 program, a coordinated plan should incorporate activities offered
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-1 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
under other programs sponsored by federal, state, and local agencies to greatly strengthen its impact.
Required Elements
Projects selected for funding shall be included in a coordinated plan that minimally includes the following elements at a level consistent with available resources and the complexity of the local institutional environment:
An assessment of available services that identifies current transportation providers (public, private, and nonprofit)
An assessment of transportation needs for individuals with disabilities and seniors. This assessment can be based on the experiences and perceptions of the planning partners or on more sophisticated data collection efforts, and gaps in service
Strategies, activities, and/or projects to address the identified gaps between current services and needs, as well as opportunities to achieve efficiencies in service delivery
Priorities for implementation based on resources (from multiple program sources), time, and feasibility for implementing specific strategies and/or activities identified
Local Flexibility in the Development of a Local Coordinated Public Transit- Human Services Transportation Plan
The decision for determining which agency has the lead for the development and coordination of the planning process should be made at the state, regional, and local levels. FTA recognizes the importance of local flexibility in developing plans for human service transportation. Therefore, the lead agency for the coordinated planning process may be different from the state or the agency that will serve as the designated recipient for the Section 5310 program. Further, FTA recognizes that many communities have conducted assessments of transportation needs and resources regarding individuals with disabilities and seniors. FTA also recognizes that some communities have taken steps to develop a comprehensive, coordinated human service transportation plan either independently or through United We Ride efforts. FTA supports communities building on existing assessments, plans, and action items. As new federal requirements must be met, communities may need to modify their plans or processes as necessary to meet these requirements. FTA encourages communities to consider inclusion of new partners, new outreach strategies, and new activities related to the targeted programs and populations.
Plans will vary based on the availability of resources and the existence of populations served under these programs. A rural community may develop its plans based on perceived needs emerging from the collaboration of the planning partners, whereas a large urbanized community may use existing data sources to conduct a more formal analysis to define service gaps and identify strategies for addressing the gaps.
This type of planning is also an eligible activity under four other FTA programs—the Metropolitan Planning (Section 5303), Statewide Planning (Section 5304), Formula Grants for
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-2 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
Rural Areas (Section 5311), and Urbanized Area Formula (Section 5307) programs—all of which may be used to supplement the limited (10 percent) planning and administration funding under this program. Other resources may also be available from other entities to fund coordinated planning activities. All “planning” activities undertaken in urbanized areas, regardless of the funding source, must be included in the Unified Planning Work Program of the applicable MPO.
Tools and Strategies for Developing a Coordinated Plan
States and communities may approach the development of a coordinated plan in different ways. The amount of available time, staff, funding, and other resources should be considered when deciding on specific approaches. Regardless of the method chosen, seniors; individuals with disabilities; representatives of public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human service providers; and other members of the public must be involved in the development and approval of the coordinated plan. The following is a list of potential strategies for consideration:
Community planning session. A community may choose to conduct a local planning session with a diverse group of stakeholders in the community. This session would be intended to identify needs based on personal and professional experiences, identify strategies to address the needs, and set priorities based on time, resources, and feasibility for implementation. This process can be done in one meeting or over several sessions with the same group. It is often helpful to identify a facilitator to lead this process. Also, as a means to leverage limited resources and to ensure broad exposure, this could be conducted in cooperation, or coordination, with the applicable metropolitan or statewide planning process.
Self‐assessment tool. The Framework for Action: Building the Fully Coordinated Transportation System, developed by FTA and available at www.unitedweride.gov, helps stakeholders realize a shared perspective and build a roadmap for moving forward together. The self‐assessment tool focuses on a series of core elements that are represented in categories of simple diagnostic questions to help groups in states and communities assess their progress toward transportation coordination based on standards of excellence. There is also a Facilitator’s Guide that offers detailed advice on how to choose an existing group or construct an ad hoc group. In addition, it describes how to develop elements of a plan, such as identifying the needs of targeted populations, assessing gaps and duplication in services, and developing strategies to meet needs and coordinate services.
Focus groups. A community could choose to conduct a series of focus groups within communities that provides opportunity for greater input from a greater number of representatives, including transportation agencies, human service providers, and passengers. This information can be used to inform the needs analysis in the community. Focus groups also create an opportunity to begin an ongoing dialogue with community representatives on key issues, strategies, and plans for implementation.
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-3 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
Survey. The community may choose to conduct a survey to evaluate the unmet transportation needs within a community and/or available resources. Surveys can be conducted through mail, e‐mail, or in‐person interviews. Survey design should consider sampling, data collection strategies, analysis, and projected return rates. Surveys should be designed taking accessibility considerations into account, including alternative formats, access to the Internet, literacy levels, and limited English proficiency.
Detailed study and analysis. A community may decide to conduct a complex analysis using inventories, interviews, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping, and other types of research strategies. A decision to conduct this type of analysis should take into account the amount of time and funding resources available, and communities should consider leveraging state and MPO resources for these undertakings.
3. Participation in the Coordinated Public Transit – Human Services Transportation Planning Process
Recipients shall certify that the coordinated plan was developed and approved through a process that included participation by seniors; individuals with disabilities; representatives of public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human services providers; and other members of the public. Note that the required participants include not only transportation providers but also providers of human services, and members of the public who can provide insights into local transportation needs. It is important that stakeholders be included in the development, approval, and implementation of the local coordinated public transit‐human service transportation plan. A planning process in which stakeholders provide their opinions but have no assurance that those opinions will be considered in the outcome does not meet the requirement of “participation.” Explicit consideration and response should be provided to public input received during the development of the coordinated plan. Stakeholders should have reasonable opportunities to be actively involved in the decision‐making process at key decision points, including, but not limited to, development and approval of the proposed coordinated plan document. The following possible strategies facilitate appropriate inclusion:
Adequate Outreach to Allow for Participation
Outreach strategies and potential participants will vary from area to area. Potential outreach strategies could include notices or flyers in centers of community activity, newspaper or radio announcements, e‐mail lists, website postings, and invitation letters to other government agencies, transportation providers, human services providers, and advocacy groups. Conveners should note that not all potential participants have access to the Internet and they should not rely exclusively on electronic communications. It is useful to allow many ways to participate, including in‐person testimony, mail, e‐mail, and teleconference. Any public meetings regarding the plan should be held in a location and time where accessible transportation services can be made available and adequately advertised to the general public using techniques such as those listed above. Additionally, interpreters for individuals with
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-4 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
hearing impairments and English as a second language and accessible formats (e.g., large print, Braille, electronic versions) should be provided as required by law.
Participants in the Planning Process
Metropolitan and statewide planning under 49 U.S.C. 5303 and 5304 require consultation with an expansive list of stakeholders. There is significant overlap between the lists of stakeholders identified under those provisions (e.g., private providers of transportation, representatives of transit users, and representatives of individuals with disabilities) and the organizations that should be involved in preparation of the coordinated plan.
The projects selected for funding under the Section 5310 program must be “included in a locally developed, coordinated public transit‐human services transportation plan” that was “developed and approved through a process that included participation by seniors, individuals with disabilities, representatives of public, private, and non‐profit transportation and human services providers and participation by other members of the public.” The requirement for developing the local public transit‐human services transportation plan is intended to improve services for people with disabilities and seniors. Therefore, individuals, groups, and organizations representing these target populations should be invited to participate in the coordinated planning process. Consideration should be given to including groups and organizations in the coordinated planning process if present in the community. Examples of these types of groups are listed below.
Transportation Partners - Area transportation planning agencies, including MPOs, councils of government (COGs), rural planning organizations (RPOs), regional councils, associations of governments, state departments of transportation, and local governments - Public transportation providers, including ADA paratransit providers and agencies administering the projects funded under FTA urbanized and rural programs - Private transportation providers, including private transportation brokers, taxi operators, vanpool providers, school transportation operators, and intercity bus operators - Nonprofit transportation providers, including volunteer programs - Past or current organizations funded under the Section 5310, JARC, and/or the New Freedom programs - Human service agencies funding, operating, and/or providing access to transportation services
Passengers and Advocates - Existing and potential riders, including both general and targeted population passengers (individuals with disabilities and seniors) - Protection and advocacy organizations - Representatives from independent living centers - Advocacy organizations working on behalf of targeted populations
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-5 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
Human Service Partners - Agencies that administer health, employment, or other support programs for targeted populations. Examples of such agencies include but are not limited to departments of social/human services, employment one‐stop services, vocational rehabilitation, workforce investment boards, Medicaid, community action programs (CAP), Agency on Aging (AoA), Developmental Disability Council, community services board - Nonprofit human service provider organizations that serve the targeted populations - Job training and placement agencies - Housing agencies - Healthcare facilities - Mental health agencies
Other - Security and emergency management agencies - Tribes and tribal representatives - Economic development organizations - Faith‐based and community‐based organizations - Representatives of the business community (e.g., employers) - Appropriate local or state officials and elected officials - School districts - Policy analysts or experts
Note: Participation in the planning process will not bar providers (public or private) from bidding to provide services identified in the coordinated planning process. This planning process differs from the project selection process, and it differs from the development and issuance of a request for proposal (RFP) as described in the common grant rule (49 CFR part 18 and part 19).
Levels of Participation
The suggested list of participants above does not limit participation by other groups, nor require participation by every group listed. Communities will have different types of participants depending on population and size of community, geographic location, and services provided at the local level. FTA expects that planning participants will have an active role in the development, approval, adoption, and implementation of the plan. Participation may remain low even though a good faith effort is made by the lead agency to involve passengers; representatives of public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human services providers; and others. The lead agency convening the coordinated planning process should document the efforts it utilized, such as those suggested above, to solicit involvement.
In addition, federal, state, regional, and local policy makers, providers, and advocates should consistently engage in outreach efforts that enhance the coordinated process because it is important that all stakeholders identify the opportunities that are available in building a coordinated system. To increase participation at the local levels from human service partners, state department of transportation offices are encouraged to work with
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-6 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
their partner agencies at the state level to provide information to their constituencies about the importance of partnering with human service transportation programs and the opportunities that are available through building a coordinated system.
Adoption of a Plan
As a part of the local coordinated planning process, the lead agency in consultation with participants should identify the process for approving and adopting the plan, and this process must include participation by stakeholders identified in the law: seniors; individuals with disabilities; representatives of public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human service providers; and other members of the public. A strategy for adopting the plan could also be included in the state’s SMP and the designated recipient’s PMP, further described in Chapter VII.
FTA will not formally review and approve coordinated plans. The recipient’s grant application (see Appendix A) will document the plan from which each project listed is included, including the lead agency, the date of adoption of the plan, or other appropriate identifying information. This may be done by citing the section of the plan or page references from which the project is included.
4. Relationship to Other Transportation Planning Processes
Relationship between the Coordinated Planning Process and the Metropolitan and Statewide Transportation Planning Processes
The coordinated plan may either be developed separately from the metropolitan and statewide transportation planning processes and then incorporated into the broader plans, or be developed as a part of the metropolitan and statewide transportation planning processes. If the coordinated plan is not prepared within the broader process, the lead agency for the coordinated plan should ensure coordination and consistency between the coordinated planning process and metropolitan or statewide planning processes. For example, planning assumptions should not be inconsistent.
Projects identified in the coordinated planning process and selected for FTA funding must be incorporated into both the TIP and STIP in UZAs with populations of 50,000 or more; and incorporated into the STIP for rural areas under 50,000 in population. Depending on the projects resulting from the coordinated planning and selection process, a single line item on the TIP/STIP for capital or operating projects may be sufficient. However, given the expanded project and subrecipient eligibility under MAP‐21, a designated recipient and state may need to consider more detailed programming, such as categorizing the projects based on the types of projects (capital or operating) and/or types of subrecipients, e.g., nonprofit, public entity, etc.
In some areas, where the coordinated plan or project selection is not completed in a time frame that coincides with the development of the TIP/STIP, the TIP/STIP amendment processes will need to be utilized to include selected projects in the TIP/STIP before FTA grant award.
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-7 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
The lead agency developing the coordinated plan should communicate with the relevant MPOs, state departments of transportation or regional planning agencies at an early stage in plan development. States with coordination programs may wish to incorporate the needs and strategies identified in local coordinated plans into statewide coordination plans.
Depending upon the structure established by local decision makers, the coordinated planning process may or may not become an integral part of the metropolitan or statewide transportation planning processes. State and local officials should consider the fundamental differences in scope, time horizon, and level of detail between the coordinated planning process and the metropolitan and statewide transportation planning processes. However, there are important areas of overlap between the planning processes, as well. Areas of overlap represent opportunities for sharing and leveraging resources between the planning processes for such activities as: (1) needs assessments based on the distribution of targeted populations and locations of employment centers, employment‐related activities, community services and activities, medical centers, housing, and other destinations; (2) inventories of transportation providers/resources, levels of utilization, duplication of service, and unused capacity; (3) gap analysis; (4) any eligibility restrictions; and (5) opportunities for increased coordination of transportation services. Local communities may choose the method for developing plans that best fits their needs and circumstances.
Relationship between the Requirement for Public Participation in the Coordinated Plan and the Requirement for Public Participation in Metropolitan and Statewide Transportation Planning
Title 49 U.S.C. 5303(i)(6) and 5304(f)(3), as amended by MAP‐21, require MPOs and states to engage interested parties in preparing transportation plans, TIPs, and STIPs. “Interested parties” include, among others, affected public agencies, private providers of transportation, representatives of users of public transportation, and representatives of individuals with disabilities.
MPOs and/or states may work with the lead agency developing the coordinated plan to coordinate schedules, agendas, and strategies of the coordinated planning process with metropolitan and statewide planning in order to minimize additional costs and avoid duplication of efforts. MPOs and states must still provide opportunities for participation when planning for transportation related activities beyond the coordinated public transit‐human services transportation plan.
Cycle and Duration of the Coordinated Plan
At a minimum, the coordinated plan should follow the update cycles for metropolitan transportation plans (MTPs) (i.e., four years in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas and five years in air quality attainment areas). States, MPOs, designated recipients, and public agencies that administer or operate major modes of transportation should set up a cycle that is conducive to and coordinated with the metropolitan and statewide planning processes to ensure that selected projects are included in the TIP and STIP and to receive funds in a timely manner.
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-8 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix A
Role of Transportation Providers that Receive FTA Funding Under the Urbanized and Rural Area Formula Grant Programs in the Coordinated Planning Process.
Recipients of Section 5307 and Section 5311 assistance are the “public transit” in the public transit‐human services transportation plan and their participation is assumed and expected. Further, 49 U.S.C. 5307(b)(5), as amended by MAP‐21, requires that, “Each recipient of a grant shall ensure that the proposed program of projects (POP) provides for the coordination of public transportation services … with transportation services assisted from other United States Government sources.” In addition, 49 U.S.C. 5311(b)(2)(C)(ii) requires the Secretary of DOT to determine that a state’s Section 5311 projects “provide the maximum feasible coordination of public transportation service … with transportation service assisted by other federal sources.” Finally, under the Section 5311 program, states are required to expend 15 percent of the amount available to support intercity bus service. FTA expects the coordinated planning process in rural areas to take into account human service needs that require intercity transportation.
The schematic below illustrates the relationship between the coordinated plan and the metropolitan and statewide planning processes.
Long Coordinated Range TIP/STIP Plan Plan Program of Projects (POP) Minimum 20 years Minimum 4 years & Grant Application
SELECTION PROCESS
Coordinated Mobility Plan A-9 Prosperity Region 4
Appendix B
Appendix B Michigan Statewide Transit Study Workshop: Region 4
Coordinated Mobility Plan Prosperity Region 4
Michigan Statewide Transit Study Workshop Prosperity Region #4: West Michigan Prosperity Alliance September 16, 2015
Grand Valley State University Michigan Alternative and Renewable Energy Center (MAREC) Second Floor, Main Auditorium 200 Viridian Drive Muskegon, MI 49440
Agenda
Registration 8:30-9:00
Welcome / Background 9:00-9:15
What We Know: 9:15-10:00 - Transportation Needs - Transportation Resources
Looking Ahead: Possible Service Improvements 10:00-10:30
Break / Assemble into Small Groups 10:30-10:45
Roundtable Discussions: What are the Priorities? 10:45-11:15
Reports from Groups 11:15-11:45
Next Steps and Wrap-up 11:45-12:00
Appendix C
Appendix C West Michigan Regional Transit Mobility Memorandum
Coordinated Mobility Plan Prosperity Region 4
MEMORANDUM
To: Sharon L. Edgar, Administrator, Office of Passenger Transportation
From: Dave Bee, AICP, Director
Date: May 1, 2015
Subject: Regional Transit Mobility
The following information provides information about select transit providers in Michigan’s Regional Prosperity Initiative (RPI) Region 4. RPI Region 4 includes two Regional Planning Agencies, the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission (WMRPC) and the West Michigan Regional Shoreline Development Commission (WMSRDC). Counties covered by WMRPC include Allegan, Ionia, Kent, Mecosta, Montcalm, Osceola, and Ottawa. Additionally, Barry County has a relationship with the WMRPC, but is still technically part of the Southcentral Michigan Planning agency. Counties covered by WMSRDC include Lake, Mason, Muskegon, Newaygo, and Oceana. WMSRDC also serves as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Muskegon Area. Two other MPOs serve RPI Region 4, the Grand Valley Metropolitan Council serves Kent County and eastern Ottawa County, and the Macatawa Area Coordinating Council serves the Holland Area.
The survey provided to the project by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) was electronically distributed to the list of transit providers (also provided by MDOT). WMSRDC gathered the surveys for its five-county area and WMRPC gathered surveys for its eight-county area. WMSRDC provided WMRPC with the surveys and staff from the WMRPC compiled and formatted the results, which are included in this memorandum.
The results are grouped by counties (in alphabetical order). Agencies serving more than one county are included under the multi-county heading. Of the 28 surveys distributed, four were not returned by the project deadline. If they are returned in the future, the WMRPC will forward the surveys to MDOT.
The surveys contain a lot of information about transit in West Michigan. Common themes throughout the surveys relate to limited service areas (especially involving crossing county boundaries), lack of adequate funding, and lack of coordination between some agencies (some expressed frustration over this point). Many people expressed frustration over the survey tool itself and some expressed concerns over trying to coordinate regional services between counties that would involve seniors transferring from one bus to another (for example at county lines). Many of the concerns are not expressed in the survey as they were shared in conversations while trying to encourage participation.
It is very obvious that the task of coordinating transit in Michigan is a huge task that needs enhanced funding and coordination.
Allegan County
Organization: Allegan County Transportation (ACT) Contact Information: Mr. Dan Wedge, (269) 686-4529 1. Service Area Portions of Allegan County. ACT does occasionally provide trips outside of the county for Senior and disability clients, usually for medical and are approved on a case by case basis. 2. Regional Demand Occasionally Allegan County Transportation receives requests for County to County transportation, but unable to provide because of limited resources and charter regulations. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Scheduling is by reservation. Hours of operation Monday-Friday 5:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. with limited Saturday service. There is an agreement with the City of Holland to cross service boundaries. Holland is in both Allegan and Ottawa County. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties ACT does have the ability to coordinate transportation needs with to a neighboring county or another transit agency but this is limited at present to seniors and persons with a disability. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs ACT has a five-year strategic plan. Can the needs be prioritized? Yes Can the needs be categorized under the following categories: o Other methods: Medical 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Allegan County Senior Services, Allegan County Community Action, Interurban Transit Authority, The MAX Transit in Holland. 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding is always an issue regarding regional transit routes as well as crossing county/transit provider lines without any County funding 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
2
Organization: Interurban Transit Authority Contact Information: Phyllis Yff, Executive Director, P.O. Box 649 Douglas, MI 49406, (269) 857-1301, [email protected] 1. Service Area Saugatuck Township and the cities of Saugatuck and Douglas. No services outside of service area. 2. Regional Demand We have many requests for service to the Holland for employment, medical and shopping. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Demand Response, Monday -Friday 7:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m., Saturday 9:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m., Sunday May-October 9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Allegan County Transit provides limited service in our area that can get them to Macatawa Area Express Service in Holland. Their other option would be taxi service. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Not identified. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Allegan County Transit, Pioneer Resources. 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding always has to be considered when adding service. Current state, federal and local funding only covers 90 percent of our system costs. Gap in Service (geographically) Laketown Township separates Saugatuck Township and the City of Holland and does not provide any bus service 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
Barry County
Organization: Barry County Transit Contact Information: William Voigt, Manager (269) 948-8098 1. Service Area One city, one Village and several burgs. All of Barry County. Some out of area non-emergency medical transports for residents. No coordination with other agencies for this. 2. Regional Demand Very little demand for this. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Scheduling – Demand Response Hours of operation are 5:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. No agreements in place that allow transit agencies to cross service boundaries/county lines. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Depending upon the urgency we could coordinate or handle it on a case by case basis. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs None identified 6. Description of Other Transit Providers None identified 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Demand 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
3
Ionia County
Organization: Belding Dial-A-Ride (Survey not returned) Contact Information: Mr. Keven Krieger, (616) 794-3278 1. Service Area City of Belding. Special arrangements and times available between the City of Belding, the City of Greenville, the City of Ionia, and the Village of Orleans. 2. Regional Demand
3. Description of Local & Regional Services Dial-A-Ride service. Hours are 6:30 a.m. -5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. – 1:30 p.m. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties City of Greenville is in Montcalm County 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs
6. Description of Other Transit Providers
7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes
8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response
Organization: City of Ionia Dial-a-Ride Contact Information: Ms. Heidi Wenzel (616) 527-4000 1. Service Area City of Ionia, Easton Township, bordering townships of Ionia and Berlin. Recently started a connective trip with Lake Odessa. Also make a trip to Muir for JARC purposes. Some trips outside of service area for employment and shopping. 2. Regional Demand There have been requests for cross county trips. There are not a lot of surrounding communities that have a transit system, so there would be no crossover of transit service area lines. County transit mobility has been a topic of conversation, but not something we are ready to approach. There has been no discussion on regional transit. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Local only, demand/response, 6:30 a.m. – 4:45 p.m. M-F, 9:15 a.m. – 12:45 p.m. Saturday Scheduling – is it fixed route, demand/response or other 4. Service to Adjacent Counties The only connection currently is with Belding through JARC. Belding comes to Ionia twice a day to drop and pick up transit users. Belding is in Ionia County. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs None developed. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Ionia County Commission on Aging 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding – the expansion required for regional transit routes would be costly and require the support of all communities involved through mileages. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
4
Organization: Ionia County Commission on Aging (Survey not returned) Contact Information: Tamie Barker, [email protected] 1. Service Area Ionia County 2. Regional Demand
3. Description of Local & Regional Services Medical Transportation Services is under the direction of Sue Gorby. The service is provided by volunteers or paid staff to transport seniors (and handicapped persons under the age of 60) to medical appointments. There are other medical transporters and their services are encouraged prior to requesting this service from the COA which offers a limited service. There is an option of a $.30 (30 cents) per mile suggested donation for a volunteer driver. There is a set fare of $1.50 per one-way-trip in-county and a set fare of $10.00 per one-way trip out-of county. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties
5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs
6. Description of Other Transit Providers
7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes
8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response
Kent County
Organization: Hope Network, Inc. (Survey not returned) Contact Information: Mr. Steve Hartman, (616) 248-5196 1. Service Area Kent County 2. Regional Demand
3. Description of Local & Regional Services
4. Service to Adjacent Counties
5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs
6. Description of Other Transit Providers
7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes
8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response
5
Organization: Interurban Transit Partnership – The RAPID Contact Information: Peter Varga, (616) 456-7514 1. Service Area The Rapid’s primary service area is the cities of East Grand Rapids, Grand Rapids, Grandville, Kentwood, Walker and Wyoming. The Rapid also provides fixed route contractual service outside of this area, including in Alpine, Byron, Cascade and Gaines Townships as well as into GVSU’s Allendale campus in Allendale Township within Ottawa County. This service into Ottawa County crosses a county line and represents the only regional transit service operating out of Kent County. The Rapid also provides limited countywide service through its involvement in Community Mental Health transportation and Ridelink transportation for seniors living in Kent County. The Rapid facilitates carpool matching and operates a vanpool program for commuters travelling into Kent County. 2. Regional Demand There are requests for commuter trips to and from surrounding communities to access employment that cannot be filled by transit. The only alternative transportation option currently in place are rideshare (carpool and vanpool) services. A comprehensive study of this was completed for West Michigan in the West Michigan Linkages Study (http://www.gvsu.edu/westmitransitstudy/) 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Fixed and demand response service. Hours of operation: Local and regional: 5:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Agreements in place that allow transit agencies to cross service boundaries/county lines? The Rapid has an agreement with Ottawa County to provide service to Allendale in Ottawa County. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties The only option other than rideshare is the service into Allendale in Ottawa County using Route 50 which is contracted with Grand Valley State University. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Local Needs Service capacity limitations Need for updated technology Improve information dissemination to public Service to neighboring counties Capacity constraints Issue of “food deserts” Matching information needs Winter accessibility at bus stops Need for positive media Funding & continuation of services Need more support equipment, vehicles, and vehicles with lifts Coordination needed Expand services for seniors and individuals with disabilities Support for public transportation 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Hope Network http://hopenetwork.org/services/support-services/transportation/ Senior Neighbors http://www.seniorneighbors.org/ American Red Cross of Greater Grand Rapids: http://www.redcross.org/mi/grand-rapids/transport United Methodist Community House http://www.umchousegr.org/ 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes None identified 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
6
Organization: Senior Neighbors Contact Information: Robert Barnes (616) 233-0277 1. Service Area Kent County. No services outside of Kent County. 2. Regional Demand We are a part of RideLink. RideLink is part of the Special Services of The Rapid. 5 agencies provide demand/response transportation for Seniors 60 and older in Kent County. We are very aware of the need for regional transit. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services RideLink schedules – demand/response, hours of operation 7:30 a.m. to 4:40 p.m. There are no cross service agreements in-place. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties No 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs RideLink and ENTF both discuss and are working on plans to help with this need. We are in the process of working on strategies. Can the needs be prioritized? Yes Can the needs be categorized under the following categories: o Increased coordination among transit providers Yes o Increased local transit service, either more service in existing service areas or new services in areas not currently served Yes 6. Description of Other Transit Providers None provided 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding and gap in service identified. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response ENTF – Kent County Essential Needs Task Force – could answer the questions better than I can. Contact person: Tracy Coffman
7
Organization: United Methodist Community House Contact Information: Mr. Dwayne Moore (616) 452-3226 1. Service Area United Methodist Community House service area is all of Grand Rapids Michigan. No service outside of service area. 2. Regional Demand We know there is a need for cross county services but we currently only focus on Kent County participants. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Fixed route Hours of operation 7:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties I believe Ridelink and Rapid Go bus provides this service. Can someone connect to another transit agency? Yes 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Increased coordination among transit providers would enhance our ability to provide more services. No surveys have been conducted to identify gaps. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers None listed. 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding and new vehicles. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response We probably need to work closer with other transit agencies we primarily focus our efforts with Ridelink and the Rapid Go Bus services.
8
Lake County
Organization: Yates Dial-A-Ride Transit System Contact Information: Vedra Gant-Paige, [email protected], (231) 745-7322 1. Service Area Lake County Michigan. No special routes, however we do link up with our transit partners through in inter-local agreements for medical, educational purposes that are outside of the service area. 2. Regional Demand What is known in our area is that people want to go to College/Universities for class. More opportunities for pharmacy, options to travel to regional medical appointments by bus and shopping. Job opportunities just across the county lines or in other counties accessible by bus. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services It is configured by demand response locally. Regional we asked for 48 hour in advance call from customer. Hours are 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. There are agreements in place that allow transit agencies to cross service boundaries/county lines. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Response: Yes, the customer calls both counties to schedule pickups. We coordinate the timing and boundary for transfer. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Are there strategies on how to meet those needs? Within Federal compliances. Yes. Can the needs be prioritized? Perhaps, according to demand/needs. Can the needs be categorized under the following categories: Increased coordination among transit providers Yes Increased local transit service, either more service in existing service areas or new services in areas not currently served. Yes Have you conducted any surveys to identify those gaps? Yes 6. Description of Other Transit Providers All inter-locals have resolutions that allow them to come in and through our service are with limitations. 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding is needed for this Regional run that includes Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority, Yates Dial- A-Ride Transit and Cadillac Wexford Transit Authority to enter Traverse City Bay Area. This service has been planned and tested out for success and is a successful route to Traverse City. Transfer areas all have restrooms and food as well as ADA accommodations. We are currently exploring a ticket pay process. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
9
Mason County
Organization: Ludington Mass Transportation Authority Contact Information: Mr. Richard Collins, (231) 845-1231 1. Service Area Ludington Area Mass Transportation Authority (LMTA) is the primary public transit provider in Mason County. LMTA is and an Act 196 Transit Authority. LMTA operates as a demand response system and contract services. Established in 1974, LMTA serves residents in the cities of Ludington, Scottville and Pere Marquette Charter Township. There is no county wide transit system available in Mason County. As a special service, LMTA provides contract service to clients of West Michigan Community Health, Senior Meals Program, Ludington and Scottville Schools. Hours of operation are: M-F 6:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m., SAT 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., SUN 8:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. The LMTA does provide transportation for medical appointments in some circumstances. 2. Regional Demand There have been requests for medical purposes outside the LMTA service area 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Local LMTA operates as a demand response system and contract services. Established in 1974, LMTA serves residents in the cities of Ludington, Scottville and Pere Marquette Charter Township. There is no county wide transit system available in Mason County. As a special service, LMTA provides contract service to clients of West Michigan Community Health, Senior Meals Program, Ludington and Scottville Schools. Hours of operation are: M-F 6:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m., SAT 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., SUN 8:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. Regional Currently there are no transit services available to Mason County residents to facilitate trips across county lines. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties At this time transit users in Mason County cannot connect to other transit agencies. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Local No list of unmet local transportation needs has been developed. Regional No list of unmet regional transportation needs has been developed. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Oakview Medical Care Facility (231) 845-5185 Oceana Medical Care Facility (231) 873-6600 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes The primary barrier to creating regional routes is the lack of funding. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
10
Mecosta County
Organization: City of Big Rapids Dial-A-Ride (DART) Contact Information: Dawn Fuller, DART Supervisor, 201 Nth Bronson, Big Rapids, MI 49307 Email: [email protected], (231)796-6243 1. Service Area Our main service area is anywhere in the City of Big Rapids city limits, however we do service about ¼ mile just outside of our service area.
Dial-A-Ride has a shuttle bus on the Ferris University Campus, the University pays for this service at a cost per hour rate. This runs from August to May and 7:30am to 7:00pm Monday thru Thursday and 7:30am to 2:00 pm on Fridays, no service on Saturday and Sunday. The University also pays for a Safe Ride shuttle bus on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights Aug thru May 12:00am to 2:30 am. 2. Regional Demand No response 3. Description of Local & Regional Services We Are Demand Response, with hours of operation Mon-Fri 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. and Sat 9:00a.m. to 2:00 p.m. DART has an agreement with Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority (MOTA) to access some areas just outside of our service area. DART also has an interlocal agreement with The Rapid out of Grand Rapids so they can come into the city area to provide a shuttle bus from Big Rapids to Grand Rapids with a couple of other city stops on the way. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Yes - DART connects with MOTA and vice versa, we have several passengers that DART transports anywhere in the city once they come in on MOTA to get into the city. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Locally we try and work with MOTA to allow access to areas that we feel there is a new need. Coordination with other transit authorities is always a great way to get to know what and where our and there services are needed. I think more meetings need to be happening. Currently DART is trying to add a stop that is less than .10 of a mile from current service area. However MOTA’S current board has refused us the opportunity to do so. Meeting again on 4/16/2015 hoping to get the approval then. Have you conducted any surveys to identify those gaps? Last survey was done in 2008, probably time to do another survey. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers MOTA- Ron Schalow – (231) 796-4896 Commission on Aging – Dawn Ketchum – (231) 972-2884 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding- always a barrier, need enough to cover cost. Gap in Service (geographically) – currently DART trying to get access from MOTA to service an area that they have already said they cannot. If it something they cannot do then they should let another transit that can provide the service do so. Other – I know of some passengers that the only way they can get to Big Rapids is to come in on a very early bus like 7am and they are stuck in the city until like 3 or 4. So maybe someone having the ability to come in to town in the afternoon only if needed. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
11
Organization: Mecosta County Commission on Aging Contact Information: Ms. Cynthia Mallory, (231) 972-2884 1. Service Area We cover Mecosta County. When medical needs cannot be met in Mecosta County, we transport to other counties for specialist needs. It is common for clients to need access to specialist outside of our county. We transport to those specialists and to dialysis to other counties such as Kent County. 2. Regional Demand No Response 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Mecosta County Commission on Aging operates an on demand transportation system. We coordinate with the Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority to refer individuals to transportation outside of Mecosta. Mecosta COA has transportation available from 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Monday-Friday. We do have agreements that allow us to transport across service boundaries. In some instances we will meet up with another agency at a drop off point to continue their service. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority can transport them to neighboring counties if they are in need of non-medical transportation. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs There has been discussion of local unmet needs at our annual meetings to see how we can collaborate to meet needs. They are yet being formulated. Basically, there is no way to take care of medical transportation needs that occur for people who are hospitalized and released over the weekend unless arrangements were made during the week. There is a pilot program we hope will start that will help with these needs. An increase in service even on the weekends. Information was gathered at our annual meeting. No official surveys sent out.
6. Description of Other Transit Providers Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority: 18710 16 Mile Rd, Big Rapids, MI 49307, (231) 796-4896 Dial-A-Ride: 1829 N State St, Big Rapids, MI 49307, (231) 796-8675 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding-right now there is no one who is funded to provide such a service. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
12
Montcalm County
Organization: Greenville Transit (Survey not returned) Contact Information: Ms. Karen Raymar, [email protected] 1. Service Area City of Greenville and Eureka Township. 2. Regional Demand
3. Description of Local & Regional Services Dial-A-Ride service. Monday – Friday 6:00 ao.ml – 6:00 p.m. and Saturday from 9:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties
5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs
6. Description of Other Transit Providers
7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes
8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response
Organization: Montcalm County Commission on Aging Contact Information: Mr. Robert Clingenpeel, (989) 831-7476 [email protected] 1. Service Area Montcalm County, Medical to Ann Arbor, Kent County, Gratiot County, Mecosta County, Saginaw County. 2. Regional Demand We do not have a connection to a regional transit line. It would take time to build this use as we have never had the benefit of a regional transit line. We would use it if available. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services We operate on a demand response with a three day prior notification. Hours of operation 8:00 a.m. -5:00 p.m. Monday – Friday with some exceptions based on needs. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Medical 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Four or Five years ago we had a ballot initiative to levy a millage for transportation that failed. Nothing has been done since that point in time. Currently agencies when they can and have the funding transport their own clients. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers DHS, Terry [email protected], Montcalm Center for Behavioral Health, Tammy [email protected], 8cap, Dan Petersen [email protected] 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes None provided 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
13
Muskegon County Organization: Muskegon Area Transit System Contact Information: Contact Information: Corey Davis, Mobility Coordinator, (231) 724-6420, E- mail: [email protected] 1. Service Area Fixed-route urban buses and seasonal trolley route(s) servicing Muskegon area, including the Cities of Muskegon, Muskegon Heights, Roosevelt Park, Norton Shores, and Muskegon Township. Regional MARC program providing bus route service to outlying communities of Holton, Montague, Ravenna, and in the White Lake area. GoBus service providing pre-scheduled curb-to-curb demand response service to all of Muskegon County for those over age 60 or with a disability. Here is the link the fixed-route maps, http://www.matsbus.com/schedules-and-maps. No regional service is provided outside of the Muskegon County service area. If an individual needs to travel outside the service area, they can work with our Mobility Coordinator to explore transportation options with other agencies. However, the majority of individuals who have inquired about these options are unable to pay for them out of pocket. 2. Regional Demand There is a substantial need/demand for regional transit mobility in this area. There are frequent inquires about transportation to all parts of Ottawa and Kent counties for work, medical appointments, and social events. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Local services are both fixed route and demand response. Hours of operation are Monday-Friday: 6:30 a.m. - 10:30 p.m., Saturday: approximately 9:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. There are no agreements in place that allow transit agencies to cross service boundaries/county lines. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties A transit user would need to use the service of another agency that provides transportation such as Pioneer Resources, American Red Cross volunteer transportation, American Cancer Society. Each of these agencies has eligibility requirements, however. If a transit user who was not eligible for the previous programs needed to travel outside Muskegon County, they would need to take a taxi, Greyhound bus, or arrange transportation through a friend, family member, or neighbor. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs A list has not been composed recently, but there have been numerous meetings involving a number of community agencies and transportation providers to discuss the unmet needs and barriers to transportation. There are strategies that can be prioritized. Needs can be categorized under coordination and the need for increased transit service. No recent surveys have been conducted. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers: None 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Full funding of transit operations between communities is the largest barrier. I reference “Full” funding, because of the inherent interest of each transit provider to service first its internal or core service area. Even if 50 percent or 80 percent funding could be identified for the operation of regional services, the transit agencies will be hard-pressed to prioritize the local match for those services relative to other unmet local needs. Gap in Service (geographically) – Geographic gaps need not be a substantial barrier, but do typically present less “transit-productive” land use areas. Also, the organizational makeup of some transit systems may limit their authority to operate across these gaps. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
14
Newaygo County
Organization: Newaygo County Council on Aging Contact Information: Mr. Joseph Fox, (231) 689-2100 1. Service Area The Newaygo County Council on Aging is the primary transit provider in Newaygo County. The Council on Aging’s transportation programs covers the entire county.
The Commission on Aging (COA) utilizes a volunteer driver network for out-of-county travel for ambulatory seniors to obtain health services not available within the county. These services include treatment of cancer, appointments with some specialists (i.e. eye, heart), and specialized surgeries. The COA also takes a group of seniors to Big Rapids once a week for shopping on a bus. 2. Regional Demand See #3. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services The Council on Aging provides three transportation service programs. These include: Demand Response, Health Care Vans, and Volunteer Medical Transportation. The Commission on Aging provides basic access services to the seniors and handicapped of Newaygo County using five buses (four are on the road regularly; one is used as a backup). All of the vehicles are wheelchair-lift equipped. Currently the service delivery system consists of rotating the vehicles on a demand-response basis in each community and providing site access for Adult Day Care (ADC). Transportation is provided for shopping, banking, accessing congregate meal sites, and running errands in the closest shopping area. The White Cloud route includes a route through the White Cloud area as well as a secondary route through the Hesperia area four days per week. Special trips to access various social, educational and recreational activities are scheduled on Fridays on a limited basis as the budget allows. The Commission on Aging provides unlimited health care access for in-county transportation utilizing five seven-passenger wheelchair-lift-equipped vans; a sixth van is available on a limited basis. Health care transportation services are scheduled primarily between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Exceptions are made based on client needs, i.e. dialysis transportation on Saturdays when there are no other means of transport. Regional The health care vans also provide out-of-county transportation to individuals who are wheelchair- bound. The health care van is available to transport anyone living in the county who is 60 years or older. The COA also takes a group of seniors to Big Rapids once a week for shopping on a bus. Other than these services, regional transit services are not provided. At this time there are no agreements that allow the COA to operate outside of its service area. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties At this time transit users in Newaygo County cannot connect to other transit agencies. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Local There are a great number of unmet local transportation needs within Newaygo County. Currently there are no general transit services within the county available to Newaygo County residents. In 2011 Newaygo County contracted with the Corradino Group consultants to undertake a Transportation Needs Study for the County. This study addressed a number of the same issues which are being addressed in the Governors Aging Transit Study. The survey conducted by the Corradino Group showed that citizens’ local priorities were trips to medical appointments, shopping, and employment. (continued)
15
Regional As part of the Corradino Study, a survey was mailed out to Newaygo County residents. Results of the survey showed that there was a demand for Regional Transit. The survey showed that the priorities for trips outside of Newaygo County were for shopping, doctor appointments, and various cities outside of Newaygo County for unspecified reasons. The top destinations where Newaygo County residents would like to go outside of Newaygo County were: 1) Grand Rapids, 2) Doctor appointments, 3) Muskegon, 4) Mall, 5) Shopping, 6) Meijer, 7) Hospital, 8) Baldwin, 9) Sparta, and 10) Wal-Mart. These destinations are ranked by the number of responses received. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers There are a number of other transit providers in Newaygo County that provide limited services. These include volunteer drivers who receive mileage reimbursements from Newaygo County Mental Health and the Newaygo County Department of Human Services. The majority of these trips are for medical appointments. 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes None identified 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
Oceana County
Organization: Oceana County Council on Aging Contact Information: Tina Houser, (231) 873-4461, 621 E Main St., Hart, MI 49420 1. Service Area Oceana County. Bi-monthly shopping trips to Mason and Muskegon counties, volunteer driving for seniors 60+ to non-emergency medical appointments. 2. Regional Demand Need for transit for seniors and non-seniors for non-medical errands out of county. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Demand/response system operates 7:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. Monday – Friday. There are verbal agreements with Mason and Muskegon counties for monthly shopping trips. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties None 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Nothing has been surveyed. No needs known at this time. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Oceana Medical Care Facility, for their patients only; DHS, for their clients only; and CMH, for their clients only. 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding – more is needed, only receive mileage and small amount from MDOT for buses. Gap in Service (geographically) transfer from county to county 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response Time needed to survey.
16
Osceola County
See multi-county heading.
Ottawa County
Organization: Georgetown Seniors Inc. Contact Information: Ms. Pam Haverdink (616) 457-1170 1. Service Area Georgetown Township, Ottawa County. We transport to greater GR area, Holland, Zeeland, Wyoming, Hudsonville, but clients reside in Georgetown Township. 2. Regional Demand We connect some clients to the Rapid, but there needs to be more access for those who live in Allendale, Jamestown, Blendon, and Hudsonville. There are no transportation services for these areas in Ottawa County. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Demand response, Monday – Friday 8:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. There are no agreements in-place with other transit agencies. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties We can connect GT residents only. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Studies have been done through Ottawa Count and MDOT 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Love Inc. Macatawa Area, Pioneer Resources, Harbor Transit 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response I just do not have enough time.
17
Organization: Harbor Transit Multi-Modal Transportation System Contact Information: Tom Manderscheid, Transportation Director, Harbor Transit Multi-Modal Transportation System, 440 North Ferry Street, Grand Haven, MI 49417 (616) 842-3220, Option 3 1. Service Area Harbor Transit provides transportation services to the City of Grand Haven, City of Ferrysburg, Village of Spring Lake, Grand Haven Charter Township and Spring Lake Township. No service provided outside of this area, but there has been on-going discussion taken place to link Harbor Transit and the Muskegon Area Transit service areas at the Lakes Mall, Norton Shores. 2. Regional Demand We have spoken to local manufacturers that have indicated a need and desire to transport workers to jobs from Muskegon County and places outside our service territorial lines to Grand Haven. There is another need to transport people to non-emergency medical appointments as well. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services We are on-demand system provide transportation services curb to curb. Monday-Friday 6:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.; Saturday 9:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. and Sunday 8:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. by appointment only. No agreements in-place at this time. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Taxi, Intercity bus or using a volunteer service provided by Four Points Senior Center. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs There is no process in place to identify strategies. The MAX in Holland, MATS in Muskegon and Harbor Transit Managers discuss transportation concerns and issues all the time and are in agreement that we could provide additional services across our service territory lines. All have worked together in my seven years at Harbor Transit. We would like to expand our evening service and provide additional service to people traveling to and from work. Since 2012, we have expanded our service territory to include Grand Haven Charter and Spring Lake Townships servings an additional 28,000 residents. Both expansions have a local millage included of .06 mills to assist in funding the areas. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers None identified 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes We have not seen any additional operating assistance from the State of Michigan since 2005. We would like to close the gap on the service territory lines between Muskegon County, Tri- Cities area ( Grand Haven, Ferrysburg, Village of Spring Lake and Grand Haven and Spring Lake Townships) and the Holland area. Then provide service to Allendale to connect with the Rapid at GVSU and provide students’ transportation to GVSU as well. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
18
Organization: Macatawa Area Express (MAX) Transportation Authourity Contact Information: Ms. Linda LeFebre, (616) 928-2486 1. Service Area MAX services the City of Holland, City of Zeeland, Holland Charter Township and Zeeland Charter Township (limited service). 2. Regional Demand Not much known 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Did not understand question of fixed route or demand/response. Hours of operation Monday through Friday 6a.m.-7p.m. and Saturday 8:00 a.m.-7:00 p.m. Night Owl service Monday through Saturday 7:00 p.m.-12:00 a.m. There are no agreements in-place. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Amtrak or Indian Trails 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Hard to develop needs when funding cuts are always looming. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers None provided. 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Funding and gaps in service. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
19
Multi-County
Organization: Goodwill Industries of West Michigan Contact Information: Ms. Meredith Champagne, 271 E Apple Ave, Muskegon, MI 49442, (231) 722-7871 1. Service Area None identified. 2. Regional Demand Many of our individuals would not be able to attend out programming without the use of private transportation means. Often they live in rural areas and using the local busing system is not an option. As many of our consumers are not independent in the community, their ability to use public transportation as a primary means of mobility, without additional supports, may not be a safe option for them. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services As we do not provide fixed routes, out integrated activities are on a flexible schedule to meet the needs of our individual. Arriving to our facility for programming however is done with organizations that have fixed schedules. Current programming hours are from 8:30 a.m. -3:30 p.m. We have other programs however that work outside these schedules. There may be an opportunity to help assist an individual with obtaining a bus pass as well if there is the ability. Agreements in place that allow transit agencies to cross service boundaries/county lines? If available, please provide those agreements. Again, our community based transit is part of a program and does not facilitate the mobility of consumers within the community. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties For our consumers, crossing county lines can be a barrier. They will need to use private transportation including taxi services to do this. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs None identified. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers MATS, Pioneer Resources, Chariots of Fire, Red Cross 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Yes to all listed below Funding Gap in Service (geographically) 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response We understand that transportation can be an incredible barrier to employment. We recognize the need for additional services within our communities and would be happy to work with partner organizations to help increase mobility in our community.
20
Organization: American Red Cross Contact Information: Mark Evans, Regional Transportation Director, 313 West Webster Ave., Muskegon, MI. 49440, (231) 343-4462, [email protected] 1. Service Area Muskegon, Kent, and Barry counties. The Barry County Service occasionally provides out of County trips for services not provided in Barry County and for trips to the Veterans Center in Battle Creek. Until the recent addition of a dialysis center in Barry County, we provided approximately 1000 rides annually to out of county dialysis facilities. 2. Regional Demand We receive many inquiries in our Muskegon office asking for out of county trips, the majority of these are for transportation to Grand Rapids for medical treatment. In Grand Rapids, we receive approximately five calls each month requesting out of county trips. Most of these are requests to go to Ann Arbor for medical treatment. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services All services are demand/response. Hours are Monday – Friday from 8:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. There are no cross service agreements at this time. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties We currently do not have a way for our users to travel to a neighboring county. As we use volunteer drivers, occasionally one of our volunteers will provide such trips to the clients with their personal vehicle out of their caring and concern for our clients. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs In Kent County, the transportation subcommittee is gathering information to address county wide transit needs. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Kent County: Hope Network (616) 243-0876, The Rapid 616-456-7514, Senior Neighbors (616) 459-6019, United Methodist Community House (616) 452-3226 Muskegon County: Muskegon Area Transit (231) 571-9645, Pioneer Resources 231-773-5355, Beal Transport (231) 750-3789 Barry County: Barry County Transit (269) 948-809 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Many of our funding streams are county specific. For example, each of our counties has a United Way and an Area Agency on Aging that supports our program and those dollars must be spent in the county that provided the funding. It is also unclear to me whether vehicles provided through Section 5310 are allowed out of the county they were purchased for. As we cover the entire county in which we provide service, there are no in county gaps. We do get many requests for out of county service, which is a gap that needs to be addressed. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
21
Organization: Area Community Services Employment and Training Council (ACSET) Contact Information: Dave Toorenaar, Associate Director, 215 Straight Ave. NW, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49504 (616) 336-4149 1. Service Area Allegan, Barry, and Kent counties for medical only. 2. Regional Demand The need for PATH participants would be crossing county lines for employment. Short term transportation would allow us time to assist with a possible Auto purchase. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services It is currently only available for Medical 4. Service to Adjacent Counties There is currently no transit connections for crossing counties, except for medical. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs Unknown 6. Description of Other Transit Providers No, except medical 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Unknown 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response I believe these conversations may be happening with in the local transit authorities, but are currently not involved in those conversations.
22
Organization: Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority Contact Information: Ron Schalow, Executive Director, (231) 796-4896 1. Service Area Mecosta and Osceola Counties excluding the City of Big Rapids Trips outside of service area available for employment (including JARC-related transportation), medical appointments, shopping trips, personal transportation, education-related transportation, contract transportation. 2. Regional Demand Frequent requests to enter and/or cross jurisdictional transportation agency boundaries for the needs specified above. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services Demand-response transportation, including dial-a-ride and modified fixed route services. Hours of operation 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Primary Inter-Local Agreements are in place for each area adjacent to our service area except Montcalm County and the City of Big Rapids. Primary Inter-Local Agreements are in place for several areas not adjacent to our service area as well. A restricted Inter-Local Agreement is in place for the City of Big Rapids. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties Customers can connect to adjacent agencies (and possibly beyond) at or near the assigned service area borders. We will assist customers in coordinating these connections. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs A Level of Need survey was conducted several years ago. Each of these areas referenced in this question is addressed in our Accessibility Plan. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers There are numerous volunteer agencies, taxi services, and the Commissions on Aging for both of our counties. These are listed in our Accessibility Plan (referenced above) and our FY2016 Coordination Plan for Local Bus Operating Assistance. 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes The primary barrier is funding. In our area, we have a locally developed plan to provide transportation between Lake, Mecosta, Osceola, Wexford, and Grand Traverse counties. We also have a locally developed plan to provide transportation between Mecosta, Osceola, Isabella, Clare, Gladwin, Roscommon, and Arenac counties. Both of these plans will require funding in excess of what we currently receive to become more than simply plans. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
23
Organization: Pioneer Resources, Inc. Contact Information: Mr. Greg Scott, 601 Terrace Street, Muskegon, MI. 49440 (231) 773-5355, [email protected] 1. Service Area Pioneer Resources, Inc. is a private 501c3 paratransit agency providing demand-response transportation services for Muskegon and Ottawa County. We primarily serve a population of 439,281 throughout the two counties and have a service range of approximately 3,091 square miles. We also serve a small contracted population in northern Allegan County. We currently provide transportation services in partnership with the following organizations: The Lakeshore Behavioral Health Alliance, Muskegon Area Intermediate School District, Muskegon-Oceana Headstart Program, and LifeCircles/PACE Program. 2. Regional Demand In Muskegon County, an informal group of transportation providers, planners, and user based organizations has gathered information to address county wide transit needs. 3. Description of Local & Regional Services All of our service, in all three counties, is demand/response. We also provide bus services: o Available for people who attend day programs or work sites such as Kandu Industries and Goodwill Industries of West Michigan o Shuttles for community-based instruction o Drivers and bus aides are well trained and dependable Hours of operation- Monday-Friday, 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Evening and weekend transportation may be available for non-profits and other qualifying agencies. We have interagency agreements with Allegan County, Muskegon Area Transit System (MATS), Macatawa Area Express (MAX), and Harbor Transit for their local areas. 4. Service to Adjacent Counties We have interagency agreements with Allegan County, Muskegon Area Transit System (MATS), Macatawa Area Express (MAX), and Harbor Transit for their local areas. 5. Description of Local and Regional Transit Needs In Muskegon County, an informal group of transportation providers, planners, and user based organizations has gathered information to address county wide transit needs. 6. Description of Other Transit Providers Muskegon County: Muskegon Area Transit Ottawa County: Harbor Transit and Macatawa Area Transit (MAX) 7. Description of Barriers to Providing Regional Transit Routes Many of our funding streams are specific to a certain category of funding that restricts the use of our services to certain groups. Pioneer Resources, Inc. offers services for people with mobility impairments, developmental disabilities, senior citizens and others facing transportation barriers. Our Fleet Includes: Lift-equipped transit buses, school buses, lift-equipped vans. As we cover the entire county in which we provide service, there are no in county gaps. However, the #1 factor affecting service in other areas is interagency agreements. 8. Description of any Obstacles to Providing Response None identified
24