1994 Tranist Summary
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1994 Summary Public Transportation Systems in Washington State August 1995 Washington State Department of Transportation This publication was prepared by the Public Transportation and Rail Division with partial financial assistance through a grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, under the Federal Transit Act of 1991. Contents 1 Introduction 2 State Policies and Objectives for Public Transportation 4 In This Report 6 Statewide Highlights 8 System Totals 10 Ben Franklin Transit 14 Clallam Transit System 18 C-TRAN (Clark County) 22 Community Transit (Snohomish County) 26 Cowlitz Transit Authority (Longview/Kelso) 30 Everett Transit 34 Grays Harbor Transportation Authority 36 Intercity Transit (Thurston County) 40 Island Transit 44 Jefferson Transit Authority 48 King County Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro Transit) 52 Kitsap Transit 56 Link (Chelan-Douglas Counties) 60 Mason County Transportation Authority 64 Pacific Transit System 68 Pierce Transit 72 Prosser Rural Transit (Benton County) 76 Pullman Transit (Whitman County) 80 Skagit Transit Authority 84 Spokane Transit Authority 88 Twin Transit (Lewis County) 92 Valley Transit (Walla Walla County) 96 Whatcom Transportation Authority 100 Yakima Transit 104 High Occupancy Vehicle/High Capacity Transportation Programs 106 New and Continuing Transportation Programs 112 Washington State Ferries 116 Glossary of Standard Transportation Terms 120 Statewide Operating Statistics – 1994 122 Statewide Financial Summary 1:TS1 / G9506-252 i ii Introduction Purpose In some instances, cities responded New Systems in 1994 immediately — using new public The Washington State Department No new transit systems appeared in transportation taxing authority — of Transportation (WSDOT) 1994. However, Kitsap Transit and sometimes contracting with the prepares the annual transit statistical the Whatcom Transportation private sector. Public transportation summary. This summary, required by Authority each annexed new areas. service disappeared in other locales. Section 35.58.2796 RCW, is Private nonprofit organizations filled Voters turned down propositions to intended to provide uniform data to these voids, serving the elderly, enact local taxes county-wide each in transit providers, the Legislative persons with mental disabilities, and Kittitas, Stevens, and Yakima Transportation Committee, and local persons with low incomes. Counties. and regional governments. The Sno-Trans, the county-wide summary contains narratives Meanwhile, local governments transportation authority conducting describing each transit agency’s persuaded the Washington State interjurisdicational planning and background, goals, and objectives, legislature to enable special purpose allocating FTA Section 9 funding in and highlighting their efforts in districts to provide public Snohomish County, went out of 1994. WSDOT’s Public transportation. The state legislature business on December 31, 1994. Transportation and Rail Division authorized metropolitan municipal compiled the statistics from corporations in 1969, county numerical data provided by transportation authorities in 1974, the individual agencies. and public transportation benefit WSDOT Reorganization areas in 1975. Policy makers at all levels of Public transportation benefit areas government continued to add state Background appeared and expanded most public transportation policies. The extent and nature of public coincidentally with the decline or Reflecting this emphasis, WSDOT transportation services have changed loss of federal and state funding for elevated the status of Public since the Washington State transporting elderly, persons with Transportation and Rail to division legislature authorized cities to levy a mental disabilities, and persons with level in June 1994. Secretary of household tax in 1965. low incomes. Interest in more Transportation Sid Morrison designated James Slakey as the There were few cities providing regional public transportation division’s first Director. public transportation in 1965. Cities services increased with population were the only governments in the growth. The role of the Public Transportation industry. The private sector provided There were 24 local governmental and Rail Division is to implement public transportation in a number of public transportation systems in 1994 and help update the policy statements cities, regionally out of Seattle, and — 18 of which are public associated with personal mobility in along most state highways. transportation benefit areas. There WSDOT’s Transportation Policy Plan. This includes advocating for As costs increased, subsidies did not were other passenger transportation increased funding and coordination appear, and the interstate highway services, such as intercity passenger associated with public transportation system permitted faster intercity rail, high capacity transit, at the state and federal levels of service, the private sector gradually Washington State Ferries, and government. abandoned public transportation transportation for persons with service in the cities, suburbs, and the special needs. more remote areas of the state. 1 State Policies and Objectives for Public Transportation In 1992, the Washington State State Definition of Public legislature directed WSDOT to Transportation define public transportation to develop a comprehensive public A publicly supported system of services transportation plan. The plan would and facilities that provides an alternative identify state policies and objectives to the single occupant automobile and for public transportation. The 1993 enhances mobility, environmental enactment of Chapter 47.06 RCW quality, and appropriate land use further strengthened this mandate. It patterns. Such systems may include any requires a public transportation plan combination of services, facilities, and as an element of the Statewide infrastructure related to transit, Multimodal Transportation Plan. paratransit, rideshare, intercity bus, passenger rail, ferries, pupil The State Transportation transportation, high capacity transit, Commission developed and adopted a transportation demand management, definition of public transportation in commuter and air taxi, people movers, 1992. The State Transportation bicycle, and pedestrian programs. Policy Plan contains this definition. Subsequently, WSDOT further refined the policies and created a series of service objectives to guide future public transportation development. 2 3 In This Report This summary profiles each local government providing public transportation services in Washington State during calendar year 1994. Each profile has two parts. The first highlights background, organization, services, achievements, goals, service standards, equipment and facilities, and intermodal connections. The second part outlines operating and financial data, along with some performance measures. In addition to the individual profiles, this summary separately summarizes: • Statewide highlights and cumulative statistics. • Developments in other public transportation system: HOV Facilities High Capacity Transit Medical Assistance Brokered Transportation Senior Transportation Rural Mobility Program Commute Trip Reduction State Public Transportation Accounts Intercity Passenger Rail • Washington State Ferries. • A glossary of frequently used transit terminology. 4 Performance Measures compilation. Yet, there remain some equipment. Contracts and leases are system-specific items that only can be operating expenses. Contracts for Each profile includes performance explained in footnotes. these services usually include costs for measures. State law sets forth the replacing equipment. Systems criteria for these measures. WSDOT On December 19, 1994, the State providing these services “in-house” developed the figures for these Auditor’s Office established a new identify equipment and facilities measures using data submitted by BARS for transit applications. It is directly as capital expenses. each system. effective in 1995. This will provide greater consistency between BARS Operation factors can affect the Figures for 1990 through 1993 consist and Section 15, as well as the statistics. Service in more highly of audited data. Most 1994 figures are information in this summary. It is not densely populated areas has different unaudited. This is because the state’s yet clear how the new BARS will characteristics, such as numbers of statutory deadline for receipt of data, affect previous years’ figures so that trips and service miles, than that in April 1, precedes when many local data can be reviewed retroactively. less densely populated areas. governments close books on the WSDOT will make every effort to Emphasis on transporting commuters previous fiscal year. The Federal assure comparability of data between is vastly different from demand- Transit Administration (FTA) 1995 and previous years in next year’s response service that elderly persons requires grantees in urban areas to summary. and persons with physical disabilities report annually according to tend to need. Section 15, Federal Transit Act. Other local governments do not have Interpreting This Summary Each statistical table includes figures this requirement. They use the for the period 1990 through 1994 and financial accounting and reporting The financial and performance a column showing the annual specified by the state Audit Office in measures in this summary can be percentage increase between 1993 BARS (Budget, Accounting, and useful