Portland Streetcar Strategic Plan 2015-2020 Contents
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Union Station Conceptual Engineering Study
Portland Union Station Multimodal Conceptual Engineering Study Submitted to Portland Bureau of Transportation by IBI Group with LTK Engineering June 2009 This study is partially funded by the US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. IBI GROUP PORtlAND UNION STATION MultIMODAL CONceptuAL ENGINeeRING StuDY IBI Group is a multi-disciplinary consulting organization offering services in four areas of practice: Urban Land, Facilities, Transportation and Systems. We provide services from offices located strategically across the United States, Canada, Europe, the Middle East and Asia. JUNE 2009 www.ibigroup.com ii Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................... ES-1 Chapter 1: Introduction .....................................................................................1 Introduction 1 Study Purpose 2 Previous Planning Efforts 2 Study Participants 2 Study Methodology 4 Chapter 2: Existing Conditions .........................................................................6 History and Character 6 Uses and Layout 7 Physical Conditions 9 Neighborhood 10 Transportation Conditions 14 Street Classification 24 Chapter 3: Future Transportation Conditions .................................................25 Introduction 25 Intercity Rail Requirements 26 Freight Railroad Requirements 28 Future Track Utilization at Portland Union Station 29 Terminal Capacity Requirements 31 Penetration of Local Transit into Union Station 37 Transit on Union Station Tracks -
FY2020 Financial Forecast Executive Summary April 2019
PRR 2019-519 Budget and Grants Administration Department Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon FINANCIAL FORECAST FY2020 BUDGET FORECAST WITH FINANCIAL ANALYSIS PRR 2019-519 PRR 2019-519 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Section 1 – ECONOMIC INDICATORS 5 Section 2 – LONG-TERM PROJECTIONS 11 Section 3 – FY2019 FINANCIAL FORECAST ASSUMPTIONS REPORT 15 A. Revenue Forecast Assumptions 1. Payroll Tax Revenues (Employer and Municipal) 19 2. Self-Employment Tax Revenues 21 3. State-In-Lieu of Tax Revenues 21 4. Employee Payroll Tax Revenues – Special Transportation Improvement Fund 22 5. Passenger Revenues 23 6. Ridership Forecasts 24 7. Fare Agreements and Programs 25 8. Fare Revenue Conclusions 27 9. Other Operating Revenues 27 10. Interest Earnings 28 11. Grant and Capital Project Reimbursements 29 12. Accessible Transportation Program (ATP) Funds 31 13. Funding Exchanges 31 14. Undistributed Budgetary Fund Balance 31 15. Total Revenues 32 B. System Operating Maintenance and Capital Cost Assumptions 16. Cost Inflation 33 17. Wages and Salaries 33 18. Health Plans 34 19. Workers Compensation 34 20. Pensions 35 21. Retiree Medical (Other Post-Employment Benefits [“OPEB”]) 36 22. Diesel Fuel 37 23. Electricity and Other Utilities 37 24. Other Materials and Services 38 25. Bus Operations: Existing Services 38 26. Accessible Transportation Program (ATP or “LIFT”) 38 27. Light Rail Operations: Existing Services 40 28. Commuter Rail Operations 41 29. Streetcar Operations: Existing Services 41 i PRR 2019-519 Table of Contents (continued) 30. Facilities 42 31. Security and Operations Support 42 32. Engineering & Construction Division 42 33. General & Administration 42 34. Capital Improvement Program 43 C. -
NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon
Portland State University PDXScholar Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Publications and Presentations Planning 6-24-2014 Do TODs Make a Difference? NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon Jenny H. Liu Portland State University, [email protected] Zakari Mumuni Portland State University Matt Berggren Portland State University Matt Miller University of Utah Arthur C. Nelson University of Utah SeeFollow next this page and for additional additional works authors at: https:/ /pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac Part of the Transportation Commons, Urban Studies Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Liu, Jenny H.; Mumuni, Zakari; Berggren, Matt; Miller, Matt; Nelson, Arthur C.; and Ewing, Reid, "Do TODs Make a Difference? NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon" (2014). Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations. 124. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/124 This Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Jenny H. Liu, Zakari Mumuni, Matt Berggren, Matt Miller, Arthur C. Nelson, and Reid Ewing This report is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/124 NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon Do TODs Make a Difference? Jenny H. Liu, Zakari Mumuni, Matt Berggren, Matt Miller, Arthur C. Nelson & Reid Ewing Portland State University 6/24/2014 ______________________________________________________________________________ DO TODs MAKE A DIFFERENCE? 1 of 35 Section 1-INTRODUCTION 2 of 35 ______________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents 1-INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... -
Evaluation Summary Public Review Draft
Evaluation Summary Public Review Draft July 12, 2007 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.0. Corridor Background.................................................................................................................... 2 2.0. Study Organization and Decision-Making................................................................................... 4 3.0. Purpose and Need of the Alternative Analysis............................................................................ 5 3.1. Need for Transit Project.......................................................................................................... 5 3.2. Purpose and Need Statements................................................................................................. 6 4.0 Definition of Alternatives ............................................................................................................ 7 4.1. Early Alternatives Screened Out............................................................................................. 7 4.2. Alternatives Carried Forward ................................................................................................. 8 4.3 Capacity Considerations…………………………………………………………………….15 5.0. Evaluation of Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 17 5.1. Travel Time and Ridership.................................................................................................. -
Fy20 Strategic Plan
FAIRFIELD AND SUISUN TRANSIT FY20 STRATEGIC PLAN FOUNDATION MISSION VISION At FAST, we strive to: To provide a safe and efficient transportation service for our community with . Provide sustainable and innovative service. a high standard of quality. Have a positive impact on our community and environment. Deliver convenient service so people will ride with us. PRINCIPLES STEWARDSHIP SERVICE RELATIONS POSITIVE OUTCOMES We will appropriately manage taxpayer We will provide our community with the We will work as a team to foster positive We will proactively seek innovative resources: time, money, people, and facilities highest quality service by focusing on safety, relations with each other, our customers, our improvements that result in positive and to serve the community and improve our convenience, reliability, and sustainability. community, and our stakeholders. sustainable outcomes. environment. VALUES COMMUNITY/ FACILITIES FINANCES FLEET OPERATIONS SAFETY SYSTEMS CUSTOMERS EMPLOYEES GOALS • Conduct annual FAST • Hire Transportation • Partner with City • Seek and assist with applying • Work with outside consultant • Conduct a Request for • Reduce preventable • Award contract and Customer Satisfaction Survey Manager, Transit engineering staff to continue for funding opportunities for and PG&E to develop an Proposal (RFP) for Transit accident rate to meet implement an updated to monitor performance Operations Manager, engineering, design, and fleet replacement, Fairfield- effective Fleet Ready Plan Operations Services and contract safety standards. transit data management goals and evaluate service Public Works Assistant, construction efforts on the Vacaville Train Station: Phase for the Corporation Yard. award contract. • Use DriveCam to system. quality. and Office Specialist following key projects: II construction (additional • Solicit bids/award contract • Complete a RFP identifying continually improve safety. -
Grand Central Building Anchor Full Block Between Se 8Th & 9Th / Se Morrison & Belmont 808 Se Morrison Street | Portland | Oregon | 97214
GRAND CENTRAL BUILDING ANCHOR FULL BLOCK BETWEEN SE 8TH & 9TH / SE MORRISON & BELMONT 808 SE MORRISON STREET | PORTLAND | OREGON | 97214 APPROXIMATELY 20,617 SQUARE FOOT ANCHOR SPACE WITH OFF-STREET PARKING AVAILABLE ANCHOR SIGNAGE OPPORTUNITY PRIME LOCATION IN THE CENTRAL EASTSIDE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ANCHOR SIGNAGE OPPORTUNITY SE MORRISON STREET Looking East From SE 7th & Morrison CENTRAL EASTSIDE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT | SE 8TH & MORRISON / SE 9TH & BELMONT THE GRAND CENTRAL BUILDING Building Overview | A Contributing Historic Property to Portland’s Fruitpacking District The Grand Central Building is a Spanish Colonial Revival building originally constructed in 1929 as a public market in Portland’s fruitpacking district and featured 23 separate vendors. Available Space | Anchor Space Total: Approximately 20,617 Square Feet First Floor: 15,617 Square Feet Mezzanine: 5,000 Square Feet Parking | The Grand Central Building features an underground parking garage with 76 parking spaces as well as a surface lot on the west side of the building with 28 additional parking spaces. Building Co-Tenants | West Face of Building Area Retailers | Building Location | Located between SE Morrison & Belmont Streets, SE 8th & 9th Avenues The Central Eastside Industrial District (CEID), the area bound by Interstate 84 to the North, the Willamette River to the west, Powell Blvd / Hwy 26 to the south, and NE/SE 12th Avenue to the east, was once the fruitpacking center of Portland. Located immediately east across the Burnside, Morrison, and Hawthorne Bridges from Downtown Portland, the CEID provides a convenient - and often more spacious - alternative to the CBD for office users and retailers looking to locate in the Central City. -
Streetcar Plan Posters
WELCOME Welcome! The purpose of this open house is to present draft recommendations from the Bicycle Master Plan and the Streetcar System Plan to the public. City sta! and citizen volunteers are here to present the material and to answer questions. The room is divided into three sections: one for the Bicycle Master Plan, one for the Streetcar System Plan, and one called “Integration Station,” where we tie the two concepts together. Refreshments and child care services are also available. The bicycle and streetcar networks will play a key role in Portland’s future. Together, they will reduce reliance on the automobile for daily tasks, they will reinforce urban land use patterns, and they will help the City achieve its goals to combat climate change. This is the beginning of a transportation transformation. WHY PLAN? PORTLAND HAS A HISTORY OF SUCCESSFUL LONG-RANGE PLANNING In 1904, landscape architect John C. Olmsted produced a report for the City Among the parks that resulted from the Olmsted Plan are Holladay Park, Irving Parks Board. The plan served as a blueprint for development of the highly Park, Mt. Tabor (shown above), Overlook Park, Rocky Butte, Sellwood Park, valued park system we enjoy today. Washington Park, and several others. Interstate MAX Opened 2004 Airport MAX Hillsboro MAX Opened 2001 Opened 1998 Portland Streetcar Opened 2001 MAX to Gresham Opened 1986 Clackamas MAX Opens fall 2009 Westside Express Service Opened Feb. 2009 In 1989, three years after the "rst MAX line opened from downtown to Gresham, 20 years later the regional rail system is well on its way to being constructed as planners laid out a vision for a regional rail system. -
Oore Ventura County Transportation Commission
javascript:void(0) Final Audit Report June 2017 Ventura County Transportation Commission TDA Triennial Performance Audit City of Ojai oore City of Ojai Triennial Performance Audit, FY 2014-2016 Final Report Table of Contents Chapter 1: Executive Summary ........................................................ 01 Chapter 2: Review Scope and Methodology ..................................... 05 Chapter 3: Program Compliance ...................................................... 09 Chapter 4: Performance Analysis ..................................................... 15 Chapter 5: Functional Review .......................................................... 23 Chapter 6: Findings and Recommendations ..................................... 29 Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2017 City of Ojai Triennial Performance Audit, FY 2014-2016 Final Report This page intentionally blank. Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2017 City of Ojai Triennial Performance Audit, FY 2014-2016 Final Report Chapter 1 Executive Summary In 2017, the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC) selected the consulting team of Moore & Associates, Inc./Ma and Associates to prepare Triennial Performance Audits of itself as the RTPA, and the nine transit operators to which it allocates funding. As one of the six statutorily designated County Transportation Commissions in the SCAG region, VCTC also functions as the respective county RTPA. The California Public Utilities Code requires all recipients of Transit Development Act (TDA) Article 4 funding to complete an independent audit on a three-year cycle in order to maintain funding eligibility. This is the first Triennial Performance Audit of the City of Ojai. The Triennial Performance Audit (TPA) of the City of Ojai’s public transit program covers the three-year period ending June 30, 2016. The Triennial Performance Audit is designed to be an independent and objective evaluation of the City of Ojai as a public transit operator, providing operator management with information on the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of its programs across the prior three years. -
Service Guidelines and Standards
Service Guidelines and Standards Revised Summer 2015 Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority | Austin, Texas TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Purpose 3 Overview 3 Update 3 Service Types 4 SERVICE GUIDELINES Density and Service Coverage 5 Land Use 6 Destinations and Activity Centers 6 Streets and Sidewalk Characteristics 7 Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics 7 Route Directness 8 Route Deviation 9 Two-way Service 10 Branching and Short-Turns 10 Route Spacing 11 Route Length 11 Route Terminals 11 Service Span 12 Service Frequency 12 Bus Stop Spacing 13 Bus Stop Placement 13 Bus Stop Amenities 14 MetroRapid Stations vs. Bus Stops 15 Transit Centers and Park & Rides 15 SERVICE STANDARDS Schedule Reliability 19 Load Factors 19 Ridership Productivity and Cost-Effectiveness 20 Potential Corrective Actions 21 New and Altered Services 21 Service Change Process 22 APPENDIX A1: Map – Households without Access to an Automobile 24 A2: Map – Elderly Population Exceeding 10% of Total Population 25 A3: Map - Youth Population Exceeding 25% by Census Block 26 A4: Map – Household Income Below 50% of Regional Median 27 B1: Chart – Park & Ride Level of Service (LOS) Amenities 28 Service Guidelines and Standards INTRODUCTION Purpose The Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority connects people, jobs and communities by providing quality transportation choices. Service guidelines and standards reflect the goals and objectives of the Authority. Capital Metro Strategic Goals: 1) Provide a Great Customer Experience 2) Improve Business Practices 3) Demonstrate the Value of Public Transportation in an Active Community 4) Be a Regional Leader Overview Service guidelines provide a framework for the provision, design, and allocation of service. Service guidelines incorporate transit service planning factors including residential and employment density, land use, activity centers, street characteristics, and demographics. -
Moving Forward 2050 Transit Projects (Draft)
MOVING FORWARD 2050 PROJECT LIST - TRANSIT (DRAFT 3-27-20) Plan ID Project Sponsor Project Name Description Location Category Project Year Cost ($M) Known Funds ($M) Fund Source 4510 Petaluma Transit Bus Replacements (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029)Routine replacement of Petaluma Transit and Petaluma ParatransitPetaluma revenue vehicle fleet, followingTransit FTA Capital useful life Projects cycles and via MTC's TCP2020-2050 process $ 16.6 16.6 MTC FTA 5307, 5339, and TDA funds TR0006 Petaluma Transit Fare Free Program Discounted or fare-free programs system-wide or for specific groups,Petaluma, such CAas K-12, seniors, low-income,Transit Improvementsweekend pilot, -summer Non Capital pilot, or paratransit2022 riders. $ 14.0 0 Unknown 4523 Petaluma Transit Fleet Expansion Fleet expansion for fixed route and paratransit service in order toPetaluma offer more service and meet growingTransit demand. Capital Projects 2020-2050 $ 5.0 0 Unknown 4539 Petaluma Transit Ongoing Bus Stop Improvements Addition of shelters, benches, trash cans, real-time informationPetaluma displays, concrete accessibility Transitpads, solar Capital security Projects lighting, maps, infoposts,2021 etc. at various $existing 10.1bus stops in Petaluma. 0.025 TDA 4515 Petaluma Transit Petaluma Transit - Ongoing Operations Operating costs for Petaluma Transit and Petaluma Paratransit,Petaluma based upon September 2019 serviceTransit levels Improvements and costs. - Non Capital 2020-2050 $ 84.0 84 TDA, Measure M, STA, Misc. Grants 4516 Petaluma Transit Service expansion Service expansion including increased service and span on majorPetaluma routes & arterials, additional weekendTransit Improvements and holiday service, - Non Capital additional west2020-2050 side and school $tripper service, 56.1 Phase I BRT implementation0 Unknown on E. -
Light Rail Transit (LRT) ♦Rapid ♦Streetcar
Methodological Considerations in Assessing the Urban Economic and Land-Use Impacts of Light Rail Development Lyndon Henry Transportation Planning Consultant Mobility Planning Associates Austin, Texas Olivia Schneider Researcher Light Rail Now Rochester, New York David Dobbs Publisher Light Rail Now Austin, Texas Evidence-Based Consensus: Major Transit Investment Does Influence Economic Development … … But by how much? How to evaluate it? (No easy answer) Screenshot of Phoenix Business Journal headline: L. Henry Study Focus: Three Typical Major Urban Transit Modes ■ Light Rail Transit (LRT) ♦Rapid ♦Streetcar ■ Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Why Include BRT? • Particularly helps illustrate methodological issues • Widespread publicity of assertions promoting BRT has generated national and international interest in transit-related economic development issues Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) Widely publicized assertion: “Per dollar of transit investment, and under similar conditions, Bus Rapid Transit leverages more transit-oriented development investment than Light Rail Transit or streetcars.” Key Issues in Evaluating Transit Project’s Economic Impact • Was transit project a catalyst to economic development or just an adjunctive amenity? • Other salient factors involved in stimulating economic development? • Evaluated by analyzing preponderance of civic consensus and other contextual factors Data Sources: Economic Impacts • Formal studies • Tallies/assessments by civic groups, business associations, news media, etc. • Reliability -
Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities I Table of Contents June 2020
Table of Contents June 2020 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1-1 Development of the CTP .......................................................................................................... 1-3 Principles of the CTP ................................................................................................................ 1-5 Overview of relevant grant programs ..................................................................................... 1-7 TriMet Role as the Special Transportation Fund Agency ........................................................ 1-8 Other State Funding ................................................................................................................. 1-9 Coordination with Metro and Joint Policy Advisory Committee (JPACT) .............................. 1-11 2. Existing Transportation Services ...................................................................... 2-1 Regional Transit Service Providers .......................................................................................... 2-6 Community-Based Transit Providers ..................................................................................... 2-18 Statewide Transit Providers ................................................................................................... 2-26 3. Service Guidelines ........................................................................................... 3-1 History .....................................................................................................................................