DOCSLIB.ORG

2010 May/June

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2010 May/June In Transit May/June2010 A Newsletter for King County Metro Transit Employees From the desk of the General Operator Loren Ott tries Manager out a prototype operator shield while driving It’s all Route 150. connected Many of the challenges we face at Metro involve a number of related issues, actions or policies. Solutions don’t always come easily, but they are rarely beyond our grasp. Here’s a case in point. As we move ahead with the security improvements detailed in my last In Transit message, I am reminded of how operator and customer security are interwoven with our fare policies and practices. Over the next few months we’ll be focusing attention on fare policy with the Metropolitan King County Council and the Regional Transit Metro tests operator shields Committee. We’ve long understood the relationship between our complex fares, team of representatives from Transit Operations, Vehicle Maintenance customer satisfaction, fare evasion, A (Component Supply Center and Fleet Engineering), and Safety is making and operator security. Now, as a result good progress on the research and testing of operator compartment shields on of reports requested by the County Metro buses. The investigating team also includes operators of the year Ineke Council, we’ll be in a better position to DeBoer (current) and Nate Chapelle (past). demonstrate those relationships. The shields, intended to enhance transit operator safety and security, are being We recently submitted a report on installed by the Component Supply Center on a range of bus types. Each base fare evasion to the County Council. Metro operators played a crucial role will test one shielded bus, as follows: in the successful completion of this ■ South Base: 6800 – 60' New Flyer study. During the survey, operators hybrid diligently recorded nonpayment and In this issue underpayment of fares by customers ■ Atlantic Base: 4100 – 40' Gillig trolley Transit center security systems ....2 Continued on page 2 ■ North Base: 3200 – 40' Gillig Fare evasion costs Metro ..............3 ■ Central Base: 2300 – 60' New Flyer Kudos ...........................................4 high-floor ■ Ryerson Base: 2800 – 60' New Flyer Short shots ...................................6 low-floor On the move .................................8 Continued on page 3 Continued from page 1 General Manager Security systems make at the farebox. Many operators also completed a questionnaire asking for transit centers safer their ideas to reduce fare evasion. That input is summarized in the report, and roviding safe, secure facilities for customers we gave it full consideration as we Pand employees is vitally important to Metro formulated our recommendations to the Transit. One of the many tools we use to fulfill council for strategies to address fare that commitment is the transit center security evasion (see page 3). system program, which installs emergency call I want to thank our operators and ATU stations and surveillance cameras to enable 587 leadership for your support and real-time reporting of security incidents. These contributions to this effort. systems allow Metro Transit Police and local law enforcement agencies to respond more We now estimate that about 4.8 percent rapidly, reduce incidents overall, and help in the of our riders contribute to fare evasion, prosecution of crimes that do occur. with 1.9 percent paying too little and 2.9 percent avoiding payment entirely. This The program has installed emergency call and deprives our budget of about $62,000 surveillance camera security systems at the each week, or a little over $3.2 million Burien, Northgate, Eastgate, Issaquah Highlands, per year (roughly 2.5 percent of our total and Redmond transit centers. A new system is fare revenue). being added to the Aurora Village Transit Center, As we take a fresh look at our fare and planning is underway for installation at other policies and practices, at the council’s sites. request we also plan to look at our fare relationships with regional transit The call stations and cameras are connected partners—Sound Transit and others— via the Internet to Metro’s Security Monitoring to develop recommendations for better Center, a facility at Atlantic/Central Base that regional fare coordination. This June is staffed 24/7. When a customer or employee This emergency call we’ll submit a follow-up report to the presses an emergency call button, he or she box at the Burien council about fare policies. The report has instant two-way communication with the will include comments on the current Transit Center provides Monitoring Center. The surveillance cameras are state of fare integration, discount fares, an instant connection regular fares, and more. It will likely with Metro’s Security activated simultaneously and begin transmitting include recommendations to further Monitoring Center and video of the incident to the Monitoring Center, simplify and align Metro and Sound activates video cameras where it is recorded. Monitoring Center personnel Transit fares, using our common at the scene of the call. immediately assess the situation and call for ORCA fare card. police response if necessary. It’s worth noting that Sound Transit When no incident is in progress, the on-site cameras are focused on potential recently instituted fare changes that vandal targets so Monitoring Center staff can use them to check on possible were designed, in part, to better align trouble spots. their fares with ours—which is a good start. The presence of these systems seems to be a strong deterrent to crime. It also helps customers act on Metro’s “See Something, Say Something” message. While we have been doing this work, another process has gotten underway. “The new security system at Burien Transit Center has encouraged our patrons When the County Council adopted the to call in dozens of potential trouble situations each week, allowing rapid law 2010 budget, it also created a Regional enforcement response when needed,” said Facilities Security Coordinator Gail Transit Task Force that is charged with Israelson. “A downward trend in incidents at this site is already apparent.” recommending a policy framework to guide future service investments or Service Quality Chief Jim Kost is making sure the word gets out to Metro contractions at Metro. operators about these systems. “We’re starting a driver awareness program on the new security systems at our transit centers so operators can understand The task force has begun its work the benefits, help inform customers how the system works, and reinforce (see page 6), and by September it will Metro’s commitment to passenger safety,” Kost said. have identified short-term and long- Continued on page 3 Page 2 Continued from page 1 Fare evasion costs Metro Operator shields hen it adopted the 2010 budget, the Metropolitan King County Council ■ East Base: 3200 – 40' Gillig Wdirected Metro to estimate the extent and cost of fare evasion and ■ Bellevue Base: 3200 – 40' Gillig to include operators in the process of making those estimates. In February ■ Spare: 3100 – 35' Gillig and March, all Metro operators at each base were asked to record detailed information about fare evasion on two full days. The results showed that about Buses will be assigned to cover 2.9 percent of passengers paid no fare (excluding free trips and children under different types of service, including age six), and another 1.9 percent paid just part of the fare. Based on these different times of day and use of the figures, fare evasion costs Metro about $62,000 a week in lost revenue. Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel. Each day, operators from each base Operators had three main will be able to drive the shielded bus suggestions for addressing fare on their regular routes. Other operators evasion: can check out a demo bus while it is parked at their base. ■ Fare simplification (i.e., eliminating zones and peak-hour The first bus with a demonstration surcharges). This is an important shield was put into service in April. part of Metro’s current work with The final one is expected to complete Sound Transit and other agencies testing by the first of July. Each bus to better coordinate regional will be evaluated for one month, with fares, which the County Council operators providing written feedback also directed Metro to do. on a form to be analyzed by Research ■ Elimination of the Ride Free and Management Information. Area and its pay-on-exit policy. Training and Safety staff members and Metro will further analyze the others will also provide input as time data to measure fare evasion permits. levels on trips where passengers pay on exiting the bus. Metro is working with the City of Seattle to update the estimated costs and Continued from page 2 benefits of the Ride Free Area. General Manager ■ More Transit Police and fare checkers. Fare enforcement Almost five percent of Metro’s term objectives for transit service investments and formulated a service patrols will help evaluate the customers fail to pay all or part of their fares. policy based on those objectives. effectiveness of this strategy The group’s job is not an easy one. and assess whether to revise Its members are learning how tightly procedures for assigning Transit Police and/or hire additional Transit Police policy issues, service objectives, or security officers. Starting this fall, Metro will begin using its new proof- and implementation programs are of-payment system on the RapidRide A Line on Pacific Highway South. If intertwined. We fully support the task the system is successful on the A Line, Metro may consider having it play a force’s efforts, and look forward to its larger role throughout the system. report. A big thank-you to all the Metro operators who helped us measure fare evasion When we receive the report and and made recommendations to reduce this problem.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Central Link Initial Segment and Airport Link Before & After Study
    Central Link Initial Segment and Airport Link Before & After Study Final Report February 2014 (this page left blank intentionally) Initial Segment and Airport Link Before and After Study – Final Report (Feb 2014) Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 Before and After Study Requirement and Purposes ................................................................................................... 1 Project Characteristics ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Milestones .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Data Collection in the Fall .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Organization of the Report ........................................................................................................................................ 2 History of Project Planning and Development ....................................................................................................... 2 Characteristic 1 - Project Scope .............................................................................................................................. 6 Characteristic
    [Show full text]
  • The Growing Transit Communities Strategy
    The Growing Transit Communities Strategy October 2013 Puget Sound Regional Council PSRC The Growing Transit Communities Partnership is funded by the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Additional funding for this document provided in part by member jurisdictions, grants from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Highway Administration and Washington State Department of Transportation. The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under an award with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The substance and findings of the work are dedicated to the public. The author and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of the statements and interpretations contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government. PSRC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For more information, or to obtain a Title VI Complaint Form, see http://www.psrc.org/about/public/titlevi or call 206-464-4819. American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information: Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations may request written materials in alternate formats, sign language interpreters, physical accessibility accommodations, or other reasonable accommodations by contacting the ADA Coordinator, Thu Le, at 206.464.6175, with two weeks’ advance notice. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may contact the ADA Coordinator, Thu Le, through TTY relay 711. Servicios de Traducción Disponible 206-971-3052, Diana Martinez. Có dịch vụ thông dịch sang tiếng Việt.
    [Show full text]
  • FEDERAL WAY TRANSIT CENTER 31621 23Rd Ave S., Federal Way, WA 98003
    FEDERAL WAY TRANSIT CENTER 31621 23rd Ave S., Federal Way, WA 98003 4,655 Average weekday boardings 1,190 Parking spaces • Owned by Sound Transit • Served by Sound Transit, Pierce Transit, and King County Metro The Federal Way Transit Center is located just west of I-5 and just east of SR 99 in what is considered the City Center of Federal Way. The Federal Way Transit Center is served by eight King County Metro routes (including the RapidRide A Line), three Pierce Transit routes, and three Sound Transit Express bus routes. The Federal Way Transit Center sits on the northern boundary of the PSRC- designated regional growth center. The Federal Way Transit Center has 1,190 parking spaces, which are typically fully utilized by 7:30 am. Figure 1: 3-Mile Context Map TRANSIT ACCESS ASSESSMENT: DRAFT FEDERAL WAY TRANSIT CENTER 1 Figure 2 provides a closer look at the area surrounding the Federal Way Transit Center. There are large parcels primarily made up of retail shopping surrounded by large surface parking lots. The superblock structure limits through connections and makes traveling on foot difficult. The Transit Center’s bus bays are located on the interior segment of a large parcel further removing it from the street network. The City of Federal Way owns several pieces of land in the vicinity of the Federal Way Transit Center with ambitious development plans (described on the following page). In addition, light rail will eventually extend to the Federal Way Transit Center. Figure 2: Half-Mile Context Map 2 FEDERAL WAY TRANSIT CENTER TRANSIT ACCESS ASSESSMENT: DRAFT LAND USE, POPULATION, AND EMPLOYMENT The area in the immediate vicinity of the Federal Way Transit Center is primarily made up of commercial land uses, with some multi-family housing just to the north and a small amount of single-family housing on the edges of Figure 3 below.
    [Show full text]
  • Sound Transit Transit Development Plan 2013-2018 and 2012 Annual Report
    Transit Development Plan 2013-2018 and 2012 Annual Report Public Hearing Held: July 11, 2013 Operations and Administration Committee Referral to Board: July 18, 2013 Board of Directors Approval for Submittal: July 25, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................2 I: ORGANIZATION .....................................................................................................................2 II: PHYSICAL PLANT ................................................................................................................5 III: SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS ...........................................................................................6 IV: SERVICE CONNECTIONS ................................................................................................. 10 V: ACTIVITIES IN 2012 ............................................................................................................ 12 VI: PLANNED ACTION STRATEGIES, 2012 – 2018 .............................................................. 19 VII: PLANNED ACTIVITIES, 2012 – 2018 ............................................................................... 20 VIII: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, 2012 – 2018 ..................................................... 23 IX: OPERATING DATA, 2012 – 2018 ...................................................................................... 23 X: ANNUAL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES, 2012 – 2018 .............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Suggested Route Changes for Fall 2012
    Suggested route changes for fall 2012 C Line – New Map of suggested change Suggested change • The new RapidRide C Line would connect Westwood Village and downtown Seattle via Fauntleroy, Morgan Junction, and Alaska Junction, replacing Route 54 and Route 54 Express (current map). Learn more about the C Line. Reason for change • Service investment. Metro is making a service investment in the C Line, its third RapidRide line. New service hours and facilities are expected to speed service and make it more reliable, attracting higher ridership. • More network connections. The C Line would provide a frequent, direct, all-day connection between Westwood Village and downtown Seattle via Fauntleroy, Morgan Junction, and Alaska Junction. It would offer connection opportunities to many frequent routes. • Simplify service. RapidRide service has features that make it easier to use, including real-time information signs and frequent service throughout the day. Alternative service • The C Line would use the same routing as routes 54 through Fauntleroy, Morgan Junction, and Alaska Junction. Service frequency Route Minutes between buses Weekday Saturday Sunday Peak Non-Peak Night C 10 15 30-60 15 15 www.kingcounty.gov/metro/HaveASay 1 King County Metro Transit | Suggested route changes for fall 2012 D Line – New Map of suggested change Suggested change • The New RapidRide D Line would connect Crown Hill and downtown Seattle via Ballard, Interbay, and Uptown (learn more). The D Line would replace Route 15 (both local and express) (current map). Reason for change • Service investment. Metro is making a service investment in the D Line, its fourth RapidRide line.
    [Show full text]
  • F Line: Burien to Renton Boulevard Station
    Fare Payment on RapidRide Where to Buy and Revalue ORCA F Line WEEKDAY/Entre semana F Line WEEKDAY/Entre semana Help keep RapidRide moving by following Cards Along the F Line To THE LANDING ➜ To BURIEN ➜ Burien Tuk Int’l Bl Tukwila Renton Renton Tukwila Tuk Int’l Bl Burien these fare payment procedures: Buy a new card, load a pass or add e-purse TC Sta, Bay 2 Southctr Sta, Bay 2 TC The The TC Sta, Bay 1 Southctr Sta, Bay 3 Transit Bay 6 Link Bay 2 Sounder Bay 2 Landing Landing Bay 3 Sounder Bay 3 Link Center Cash and Tickets – Always board through value to your existing ORCA card at ORCA Transit Southctr Andover L’acres S 2nd St N 10th St N 10th St S 2nd St L’acres Andover Southctr Transit the front door and pay at the farebox. The vending machines located at the Burien Rdway & Blvd & Pk W & Wy & & & Garden & Garden & Wy & Pk W & Blvd & Rdway & SW 148th St* Int’l Blvd* Baker Blvd* Acc Rd* Burnett Av S* Av N* Av N* Burnett Av S* Acc Rd* Baker Blvd* Int’l Blvd* SW 148th* driver will give you a paper transfer which Transit Center, Sounder Tukwila Station Stop #52306 Stop #60922 Stop #59310 Stop #59882 Stop #46477 Stop #46505 Stop #46505 Stop #46478 Stop #59881 Stop #59314 Stop #60923 Stop #52304 is your receipt for proof of payment. Be and Link Light Rail Tukwila International 4:45 4:56 5:04 5:10 5:25 5:33 5:23 5:29 5:45 5:50 5:58 6:10 Blvd Station.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Standards Manual October, 2009 King County Metro Graphic Standards and Guidelines
    Design Standards Manual October, 2009 King County Metro Graphic Standards and Guidelines Contents Introduction to the RapidRide Brand....................................................................1-1 RapidRide Brand Identity Trademark...................................................................................................1-3 Color Palette ...............................................................................................1-4 Proportions.................................................................................................1-5 Clear Space.................................................................................................1-6 Color ..........................................................................................................1-7 Reversed.....................................................................................................1-8 Incorrect Usage...........................................................................................1-9 In Conjunction with the King County Metro Logo .......................................1-11 Print and Electronic Applications System Brochure Cover................................................................................2-1 System Map Style........................................................................................2-2 Line Map Style ............................................................................................2-3 Metro System Map with RapidRide Lines......................................................2-5
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-2022 Transit Development Plan
    (This page intentionally left blank.) Table of Contents Section 1 – Organization 3 Section 2 – Physical Plant 7 Section 3 – Service Characteristics 11 Section 4 – Service Connections 27 Section 5 – Notable Activities in 2016 31 Section 6 – Proposed Action Strategies: 2017 – 2022 51 Section 7 – Capital Improvement Program: 2017 – 2022 61 Section 8 – Operating Revenues and Expenditures: 2017 - 2022 65 Appendices Appendix A – Six-Year Financial Plan: 2017 - 2022 Appendix B – Operating Data 2016 Appendix C – Unfunded and Unprogrammed Projects Appendix D – Inventories: Rolling Stock Appendix E – Inventories: Equipment and Facilities 1 Transit Development Plan 2017 – 2022 (This page intentionally left blank.) 2 Transit Development Plan 2017 – 2022 Section 1 - Organization Governance and Structure Pierce Transit is a Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (PTBA) incorporated under authority of Chapter 36.57A of the Revised Code of Washington. In 1979 voters passed a 0.3 percent sales tax to fund public transportation, which also formed the PTBA. Pierce Transit is currently funded through a combination of sales tax revenues, fares and grants, as further detailed in Section 9: Operating Revenues and Expenditures. Pierce Transit provides public transport services in the urbanized portions of Pierce County, as illustrated in Figure 1-1. This is an area covering 292 square miles that generally conforms to the county’s growth management boundary and contains an estimated 70 percent of the county population. The service area includes the incorporated cities and towns of Auburn, Edgewood, Fife, Fircrest, Gig Harbor, Lakewood, Milton, Pacific, Puyallup, Ruston, Steilacoom, Tacoma, and University Place. It also includes multiple population centers within unincorporated Pierce County.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preemptive Analysis of Preliminary Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Design in King County, Washington
    Incorporating Social Equity in Transit Service and Capital Planning: A Preemptive Analysis of Preliminary Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Design in King County, Washington Ian Kowalski A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Urban Planning University of Washington 2019 Committee: Jan Whittington Joaquín Herranz, Jr. Qing Shen Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Urban Design and Planning © Copyright 2019 Ian Kowalski University of Washington Abstract Incorporating Social Equity in Transit Service and Capital Planning: A Preemptive Analysis of Preliminary Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Design in King County, Washington Ian Kowalski Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Jan Whittington, Associate Professor Department of Urban Design and Planning Co-Chair of the Supervisory Committee Joaquín Herranz, Jr., Associate Professor Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy and Governance Co-Chair of the Supervisory Committee Qing Shen, Professor Department of Urban Design and Planning This study presents an approach for the evaluation of the equity of transportation investments in King County, Washington, with attention to upgrades of existing routes to new “bus rapid transit” service. A review of philosophical and economic literature provides a theoretical foundation, while existing policy and law establishes a regulatory and practical framework that bounds this work. The author is particularly concerned with the extent to which service and capital investments for bus rapid transit expansion in southern King County can be integrated and evaluated across socioeconomic user groups. This study attempts to answer this question by employing a series of quantitative models that include network analysis, transportation gap analysis, and life-cycle cost analysis to evaluate transit equity in southern King County, and specifically along the proposed RapidRide I Line bus rapid transit corridor.
    [Show full text]
  • November/December 2010
    In Transit November/December 2010 A Newsletter for King County Metro Transit Employees From the desk of the General Manager Preparation paid off After nearly two years of hard work, we We learned got the opportunity to test our new snow from our plan in the days before Thanksgiving. experiences with snow and We learned some hard lessons about ice in the winter extreme winter weather two years ago. of 2008-2009. Those experiences led us to create and improve our plan for responding to a major snow event, including how we communicate with our customers. We’ve been hearing that this year’s strong La Niña weather pattern would mean Getting ready for snow a colder, wetter winter in the Pacific orecasters have predicted a cold, wet winter for the Pacific Northwest, and Northwest. Over the past six months we put a major focus on getting ready for Fwe’ve already seen snow and below-freezing temperatures in King County. the possibility of a rough winter. I’d like to Fortunately, we’ve been working hard to make sure we are ready—both to keep thank every one of you who contributed providing service and to keep our customers informed. to these efforts. For more information about our preparations, see the main We updated the snow operations and customer communications plan we story on this page. developed in 2009. The plan defines snow routing for each bus route as well as a system for determining whether a route is following its regular or snow route. On Monday, Nov. 22, a winter storm The plan also identifies an emergency service network of core service that Metro, rolled in, dumping snow on our streets in partnership with local jurisdictions, will establish and maintain along main and freezing it to ice that stayed around for three days.
    [Show full text]
  • King County Metro Rapidride Performance Evaluation Report
    King County Metro RapidRide Performance Evaluation Report Prepared for Prepared by December 2014 King County Metro RapidRide Performance Evaluation Report | 2 King County Metro CONTENTS Introduction ....................................................................................................................4 Performance Evaluation ................................................................................................5 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Performance Evaluation Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6 Comparison to other National BRT Service ..................................................................20 Performance Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 21 Cost Effectiveness of Capital Expenditures .................................................................22 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Cost Effectiveness Performance Summary .......................................................................................................... 22 Cost Effectiveness of Operating Costs ..........................................................................32
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Three Transportation
    CHAPTER THREE TRANSPORTATION 3.0 Introduction ________________________________________________ 1 3.1 Policy Background __________________________________________ 2 State Policies ___________________________________________________ 2 Regional Policies _______________________________________________ 2 3.2 The Transportation Concept __________________________________ 3 How Do People Travel? _________________________________________ 5 3.3 Transportation Vision and Goals _____________________________ 7 3.4 Existing Conditions ________________________________________ 15 Street and Highway System _____________________________________ 15 Non-Motorized ________________________________________________ 27 Transit _______________________________________________________ 31 Freight and Goods _____________________________________________ 36 Transportation System Management (TSM) ______________________ 37 3.5 Future Transportation Vision ________________________________ 41 Introduction to the Layered Network ____________________________ 42 Future Travel __________________________________________________ 42 Transportation Level of Service _________________________________ 44 Project Prioritization ___________________________________________ 44 Modal Networks ______________________________________________ 46 Regional Growth Center Mode Share Goal _______________________ 50 High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) ________________________________ 50 Non-Motorized ________________________________________________ 50 Transit _______________________________________________________
    [Show full text]