DOCSLIB.ORG

( It Was Developed by Easter Seals Project ACTION, a Technical Assistance Center Operated by Easter Seals, Inc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
( It Was Developed by Easter Seals Project ACTION, a Technical Assistance Center Operated by Easter Seals, Inc This publication was downloaded from the National Aging and Disability Transportation Center’s website (www.nadtc.org). It was developed by Easter Seals Project ACTION, a technical assistance center operated by Easter Seals, Inc. through a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. National Aging and Disability Transportation Center [email protected] 866-983-3222 Accessibility Design Guide for Bus Rapid Transit Systems Executive Summary Easter Seals R Accessibility Design Guide for Bus Rapid Transit Systems Executive Summary Prepared for: Easter Seals Project ACTION 1425 K Street NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20005 Phone: 202-347-3066 / 800-659-6428 TDD: 202-347-7385 www.projectaction.org Prepared by: TranSystems Corp. with Oak Square Resources, LLC April 2009 Easter Seals Project ACTION is funded through a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of Easter Seals Project ACTION in the interest of information exchange. Neither Easter Seals, Easter Seals Project ACTION, nor the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration assumes liability for its contents or use thereof. Easter Seals R ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Project Team and Advisory Committee Nevada: Sandra Stanko, along with Robert Highfill of Jacobs Engineering and Brian VanHine of Veolia The Accessibility Design Guide for Bus Rapid Transit Transportation Systems was developed by TranSystems of Boston, Mass for Easter Seals Project ACTION. The project • Lane Transit District: Terry Parker, Susan team included Project Manager Rosemary Gerty of Hekimoglu, Stefano Viggiano, Cosette Rees, TranSystems; Caroline Ferris of TranSystems; Don George Trauger, Joe McCormack, along with staff Kloehn of Tindale-Oliver & Associates in Tampa (formerly from Alternative Work Concepts and members of with TranSystems); and Susan Bregman of Oak Square the LTD Transportation Committee Resources, LLC, in Brighton, Mass. The team was • Greater Cleveland Regional Transportation assisted by the Project Advisory Committee, which Authority: Michael Schipper represented the diverse interests of transit agencies and • Miami-Dade Transit: Ronald Steiner, along with people with disabilities. Ilene Hyams of Miami-Dade County Office of ADA Coordination Members of the Project Advisory Committee • Port Authority of Allegheny County: David Wishwill • David Evans, Palm Beach County Chapter, National Federation of the Blind; member South • Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority: Karen Florida Regional Transportation Authority (Tri-Rail) Burns, Mary Ainsley, Joe Cosgrove, Kathy Cox, ADA Advisory Committee Gary Talbot • Marilyn Golden, policy analyst, Disability Rights Other Acknowldgments Education & Defense Fund (DREDF) We wish to thank Dennis Cannon of the U.S. Access • Ilene Hyams, senior ADA specialist, Office of ADA Board; Cheryl Hershey, Jonathan Klein, and David Coordination (Miami, Fla.) Knight of the Federal Transit Administration Office of • Cynthia Lister, regulatory coordinator, SEPTA Civil Rights; Dennis Hinebaugh and Cheryl Thole of the (Philadelphia, Pa.) National Bus Rapid Transit Institute at the Center for • Michael Miller, accessibility manager, Sound Urban Transportation Research (CUTR), University of Transit (Seattle, Wash.) South Florida; and the Easter Seals Project ACTION staff for their review and comments. • Terry Parker, accessible services manager, Lane Transit District (LTD) (Eugene, Ore.) and Additional thanks to Sandra Stanko, Bob Highfill, Terry Easter Seals Project ACTION National Steering Parker, and Marilyn Golden for reviewing the final Committee Liaison documents and to RTC and LTD for providing some of Case Study Sites the photographs used in this document. We wish to express our appreciation for the assistance of the following agencies and individuals that served as case study sites for this project: • Regional Transportation Commission of Southern provides guidance to transit agencies on BRT & Accessibility: Getting the development and implementation of it Right from the Start BRT systems. An updated CBRT is expected to be published in 2009. Executive Summary This paper also highlights solutions identified as part of the ESPA project that will help transit agencies to plan Introduction and implement accessible BRT services, especially related to vehicle This paper highlights the results of a design, station platform and stop design, study funded prepared by TranSystems the platform-to-vehicle interface, and for Easter Seals Project ACTION public involvement in the BRT planning (ESPA) to develop an Accessibility and implementation process. Design Guide for Bus Rapid Transit Systems. The report describes The APTA conference presentation accessible design elements that apply to will focus on the experience of the BRT BRT systems both from the regulatory systems operated by two transit perspective of the Americans with agencies—the Regional Transportation Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) as well as Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC) the concept of universal design, which in Las Vegas, Nevada and Lane Transit means including barrier-free design District (LTD) in Eugene, Oregon—that elements that will enhance system made accessibility a priority right from accessibility for all persons, including the start and were especially proactive individuals with disabilities. in ensuring that vehicles and stations/stops were made accessible for The intent of the project was not to all customers, including people with give detailed engineering information, disabilities, older adults, bicyclists, and but to provide guidance and possible the general public. solutions for incorporating accessible design elements necessary to meet or ADA and BRT SYSTEMS exceed ADA accessibility requirements. The Design Guide identifies accessibility The ADA was enacted to ensure that issues common to BRT systems, people with disabilities have equal documents effective ways of addressing opportunities and access to public those issues, and provides examples of spaces and services as persons who do how these issues are currently being not have disabilities. Although ADA addressed through six case studies. A requirements are well documented for companion ADA Compliance Checklists conventional fixed route bus and rail for Bus Rapid Transit Facilities Design systems, because BRT is a hybrid and Construction is included as a self- service with characteristics of both bus assessment tool. and rail it may be less obvious how the ADA requirements apply. The information presented in the Design Guide and Checklists also may This ambiguity has prompted be used to supplement the FTA’s activities at the Federal level that Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit include proposed changes to the ADA Decision-Making report (CBRT), which Accessibility Guidelines known as 1 ADAAG. The U.S. Access Board is broader definition of stations (i.e., level tasked with developing guidelines for boarding bus systems and rail) as accessible buildings, facilities, and follows: vehicles. In 2006, U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) adopted the • Current Wording: updated ADAAG as its current ADA F218.2 New and Altered Fixed Standards for Transportation Facilities. Guideway Stations. New and USDOT also adopted the ADA altered stations in rapid rail, light rail, Accessibility Standards for commuter rail, intercity rail, and high Transportation Vehicles, as amended speed rail, and other fixed guideway through 1998. systems shall comply with 810.5 through 810.10. Revised Draft ADAAG • Proposed Wording: F218.2 New and Altered Stations. On November 19, 2008, the U.S. New and altered stations for level Access Board released a revised draft boarding bus systems and fixed of proposed updates for the ADA guideway systems, including, but not Accessibility Guidelines for Buses and limited to, rapid rail, light rail, Vans, with public comments due by commuter rail, intercity rail, and high January 20, 2009. Of particular interest speed rail, shall comply with 810.5 to BRT systems is the inclusion of through 810.10. specific requirements for level boarding buses, vehicles which did not exist in And proposes to change the reference 1991 when the original guidelines were from rail platforms to station platforms published and are now being used in as follows: many BRT systems. The 2008 draft guidelines define a level boarding bus • Current Wording: system as: 810.5 Rail Platforms. Rail platforms shall comply with 810.5. A system on which buses operate • Proposed Wording: where some or all of the designated 810.5 Station Platforms. Station boarding and alighting areas have platforms in level boarding bus station platforms, and the design of systems and fixed guideway the station platforms and the systems, shall comply with 810.5. vehicles are coordinated to provide level boarding. If adopted, these changes would require level boarding bus systems such As noted, the ADAAG for Buildings as BRT to comply with applicable and Facilities were revised in 2004 and ADAAG standards that formerly applied adopted by USDOT in 2006. The current only to rail platforms and vehicles. For ADAAG primarily standards apply to key example, 810.5.1 would require that and new rail facilities (i.e., stations), with station platforms not exceed a slope of only limited applicability to bus stops. 1:48 (2.1%) in all directions. However, in addition to the proposed definition of level boarding bus systems
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BUS STATIONS AS TOD ANCHORS REPORT Prepared in Accordance with California Senate Bill 961, 2017-2018 Regular Session
    Housing Financing Tools and Equitable, Location-Efficient Development in California BUS STATIONS AS TOD ANCHORS REPORT Prepared in Accordance with California Senate Bill 961, 2017-2018 Regular Session Prepared for: Governor's Office of Planning and Research December 29, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 5 Report Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 5 Report Organization ................................................................................................................ 5 II. BACKGROUND ON THE SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD INFILL FINANCE AND TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS ACT ................................................................................................................ 7 Definition of Bus Transit ......................................................................................................... 7 Extent of Use ........................................................................................................................... 7 III. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 9 Literature Overview ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Bus Rapid Transit Feasiblity Study
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 MODES AND TRENDS THAT FACILITATE BRT ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 2.1 Microtransit ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Shared Mobility .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Mobility Hubs ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.4 Curbside Management .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 3 VEHICLES THAT SUPPORT BRT OPERATIONS ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Automated Vehicles .................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 APTA Public Transportation Fact Book
    2013 Public Transportation Fact Book 2013 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACT BOOK 64th Edition October 2013 PUBLISHED BY American Public Transportation Association Fact book historical tables and additional data are available at: http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Pages/transitstats.aspx American Public Transportation Association 1666 K Street, N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 TELEPHONE: (202) 496-4800 E-MAIL: [email protected] www.apta.com APTA’s Vision Statement Be the leading force in advancing public transportation. APTA’s Mission Statement APTA serves and leads its diverse membership through advocacy, innovation, and information sharing to strengthen and expand public transportation. prepared by John Neff, Senior Policy Researcher (202) 496-4812 [email protected] Matthew Dickens, Policy Analyst (202) 496-4817 [email protected] PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACT BOOK American Public Transportation Association Washington, DC October 2013 Material from the 2013 Public Transportation Fact Book may be quoted or reproduced without obtaining the permission of the American Public Transportation Association. Suggested Identification: American Public Transportation Association: 2013 Public Transportation Fact Book, Washington, DC, October, 2013. TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents APTA AND THE FACT BOOK ......................................... 5 Figure 11: Percent of Systems with Arrival Time Formats .................................................................. 15 NATIONAL DATA SUMMARY ......................................... 6 VEHICLES .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BRT Arlington
    Reconsider the Curb MAITE Conference Curb Space is Limited & in High Demand Transit Delivery Ride Hailing (Uber/Lyft) Bicycle Access Curb Space is Limited & in High Demand Reconsider the Curb: 1 City Block Reconsider the Curb: 1 City Block Reconsider the Curb: 1 City Block 2,000 1,800 1,750 What Does a Curb Space Represent? 1,500 1 car = ~1.1 people / hr. 1,250 1,000 OR 750 500 30 drop-offs = 33+ people / hr. 250 2 minutes per drop-off / pick-up (avg.) Uber, Lyft, Taxi, Micro-Transit, Robot Taxis Reconsider the Curb Chicago, IL ATLANTA DOWNTOWN ATLANTA DOWNTOWN Reconsider the Curb Huntington, NY McKinney, TX Somerville, MA New York, NY (NACTO) Boston, MA Reconsider the Curb: 1 City Block BostonBRT & Local Bus Pilots 2018 Julia Wallerce, Boston Program Manager Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) September 26th, 2019 ITDP’s Mission: To promote sustainable and equitable transport to create inclusive, people‐oriented cities Our Focus on BRT…. Bus Rapid Transit: • High capacity • High speed • Customer oriented Not an old bus running in a bus lane! Defining BRT Dedicated bus lanes at least 1.9 miles long Use Keywords The BRT Standard online 5 BRT Basics Dar es Salaam Busway Alignment: Bus lanes separated from traffic with a median alignment Eugene, Oregon: Emerald Express (EmX) Off‐board Fare Collection Mexico City, Mexico: Metrobus Platform Level Boarding Ahmedabad, India: Janmarg High‐quality stations: Wide, weather protected, safe, well‐lit Yichang, China Buses with multiple, very wide doors Bogota, Colombia: TransMilenio BRT in the US: 11 cities, 12 corridors U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Building a Better Bus Rapid Transit System with Transit Signal Priority
    WHITE PAPER GPS-enabled Platform Building a better Bus Rapid Transit system with Transit Signal Priority As urbanization and pressure on public transit Combining the flexibility of CASE STUDY: systems in cities around the world intensifies, buses with the efficiency Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is becoming an ALBUQUERQUE, NM increasingly attractive answer to questions of of rail, Bus Rapid Transit This whitepaper examains how smart passenger mobility. systems make smart use of BRT systems often employ Transit Combining the flexibility of buses with the technology, infrastructure and Signal Priority solutions to reduce efficiency of rail, BRT systems make smart delays at intersections and main- transit operations to create a use of technology, infrastructure and transit tain schedules. operations to create a faster, more reliable and faster, more reliable and more more convenient public transport service for convenient public transport It’s this reliability which is the hall- the most in-demand routes. These are regularly mark of successful BRT and BRT- implemented in areas where congestion service for the most in- lite systems, and reliable on-time and other factors have led to bus services demand routes. performance which attracts riders. struggling to serve the needs of commuters No place has done this better than and other riders. Because it is far less Albuquerque, New Mexico where expensive to build and operate than rail, BRT the new Albuquerque Rapid Tran- works particularly well in growing mid-sized cities where standard bus services are struggling sit (ART) route use TSP to make to meet demand, but there is still insufficient population density to justify the investment-levels operations more efficient.
    [Show full text]
  • Operating a Bus Rapid Transit System
    APTA STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM APTA-BTS-BRT-RP-007-10 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE Approved October, 2010 American Public Transportation Association APTA BRT Operations Working 1666 K Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20006-1215 Group Operating a Bus Rapid Transit System Abstract: This Recommended Practice provides guidance for operational considerations for bus rapid transit systems. Keywords: bus rapid transit (BRT), operations Summary: BRT is a suite of elements that create a high-quality rapid transit experience using rubber-tired vehicles. This experience often includes a high degree of performance (especially speed and reliability), ease of use, careful attention to aesthetics and comprehensive planning that includes associated land uses. BRT seeks to meet or exceed these characteristics through the careful application of selected elements. Scope and purpose: The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to planners, transit agencies, local governments, developers and others interested in operating a BRT systems or enhancing existing BRT systems. This Recommended Practice is part of a series of APTA documents covering the key elements that may comprise a BRT system. Because BRT elements perform best when working together as a system, each Recommended Practice may refer to other documents in the series. Agencies are advised to review all relevant guidance documents for their selected elements. This Recommended Practice represents a common viewpoint of those parties concerned with its provisions, namely, transit operating/planning agencies, manufacturers, consultants, engineers and general interest groups. The application of any standards, practices or guidelines contained herein is voluntary. In some cases, federal and/or state regulations govern portions of a rail transit system’s operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices for Engaging Anchor Institutions and Neighborhoods
    Capitol Region Council of Governments Building Corridors of Opportunity: Best Practices for Engaging Anchor Institutions and Neighborhoods Final Report December 1, 2016 Acknowledgements Building Corridors of Opportunity: Best Practices for Engaging Anchor Institutions and Neighborhoods, Final Report was prepared with financial support from the Hartford Foundation for Public Giving. The report was prepared for the Capitol Region Council of Governments by the consulting firm of HR&A Advisors, Inc. Building Corridors of Opportunity, Final Report 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary.........................................................05 Case Studies....................................................................19 Cleveland Healthline...............................................29 East Liberty Revitalization......................................42 Cortex Innovation Community................................52 Maryland TOD Initiative.........................................63 Urban Essex Coalition for Smart Growth............72 Emerald Express (EmX)...........................................82 Appendix..........................................................................90 Building Corridors of Opportunity, Final Report 3 Executive Summary CTfastrak is a bus rapid transit (BRT) service that began operation in 2015, running from downtown Hartford to downtown New Britain, Connecticut. • With a dedicated right-of-way, frequent service, pre-boarding payment system, and specially designed buses, it is one of the highest-rated systems
    [Show full text]
  • 24% 41% 1 in 5
    ART ALBUQUERQUE RAPID TRANSIT BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) Bus Rapid Transit has shown that it can facilitate development and Improving transportation options is vital to Albuquerque’s future quality community growth, creating places where people want to live, work and of life and economic development. Albuquerque Rapid Transit (ART) offers play with a neighborly focus, mix of uses, and pedestrian priority. quick, simple, and safe first-class travel along with economic benefits. Transit-oriented development has proven to be a catalyst for new investment and businesses and supportive of existing corridor businesses, including restaurants, retail, and entertainment. ART would also provide opportunities for improved streetscape and walkability, attracting more people to live along the corridor. ELEMENTS OF BRT • Dedicated road, lane or • Pre-boarding ticketing mixed traffic route • Level boarding • Frequent service • Stops from ¼ to ½ mile or • Priority signals at more apart intersections Conceptual Design VISUALIZATION PURPOSE ONLY PROJECT BENEFITS Faster and more reliable service WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF CENTRAL AVENUE: • 15% improvement in travel time • 20-25% improved on-time performance 24% 41% 1 in 5 • Improved safety and security of all employment of all ABQ Ride households have Demand ridership income below • 5.3 million riders in 2014 — nearly 15,000 per day and 41% of the poverty level total number of ABQ RIDE passengers • 50% estimated growth of ridership in next 5 years (based on preliminary FTA STOPS model output) • ART would connect with
    [Show full text]
  • West Broadway Transit Study Economic Development Impacts of Transit Alternatives
    West Broadway Transit Study Economic Development Impacts of Transit Alternatives 11/11/2015 Prepared by the SRF Consulting Group Team for Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 3 II. Baseline Development Scenario ............................................................................................................... 3 III. Literature Review & Case Study Findings ............................................................................................... 9 IV. Developer Interview Findings ................................................................................................................ 17 V. BRT and Streetcar Development Scenarios........................................................................................... 19 Appendix: Transit Economic Development Impacts Case Studies ............................................................. 24 West Broadway Transit Study 2 I. Introduction Metro Transit, in collaboration with Hennepin County and the Cities of Minneapolis, Robbinsdale, and Golden Valley, is seeking guidance on the economic development impacts of proposed streetcar and bus rapid transit (BRT) alternatives along the West Broadway corridor. As documented in the April 1, 2015 methodology statement, transit can support economic development by enhancing mobility and providing a placemaking amenity for the corridor. The Team developed a financial model in order to
    [Show full text]
  • It's Your Bus. It's Your Emx
    Better Cover West Eugene Service Redesign togetherBus Image . A Riders Guide to New Service in West Eugene Beginning September 17, 2017 It’s Your Bus. It’s Your EmX. At Lane Transit District, we are driven by the people we serve, providing independence to those in the community. Every year, millions of riders depend on LTD to get to work, school, medical appointments, and the many other activities that make this community home. To learn more about what drives us, visit LTD.org It’s Your Bus... After years of hard work, the newest LTD rapid transit connection on West 11th is complete. With new pavement and asphalt, many young trees that will soon provide shade over the roadway, new efficient street lights, and fiber optic cables enhancing quality of service,EmX is ready to take you to more places you want to go. The process was quite an undertaking. Now it’s time to enjoy the benefits. It’s Your EmX West 1 RiverRoad Silver Ln Station Cubit Barger Grove 41 Hwy 99 River Rd River N Park Echo Hollow Echo Hollow Greenhill Northwest Expressway Terry Beltline Park Royal N LTD Station Estación de LTD LTD Park & Ride Fairfield Fixed Route to EmX 41 Transfer Point 41 EmX 55 36 Route 36 1st 41 Route 41 93 55 Route 55 6th Route 78 78 Seneca Seneca 7th 93 Route 93 Bertelson Eugene Danebo Park & Ride Fred Meyer Target 10th Station Hwy 126 11th 93 93 13th Walmart 78 Olive UO Bailey Hill Bailey Oak Patch 18th Station 36 78 Kevington Hawkins Garfield Chambers Hilyard Alder Kincade Warren Wilshire Brittany 2 Better Connections RiverRoad The EmX West will complement and expand the new service Silver Ln Station changes in West Eugene, Churchill and Bethel/Danebo neighborhoods, as it travels along West 6th, 7th and 11th Avenues, Cubit Barger Grove and Garfield and Charnelton Streets.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Use Impactsof of Bus Rapid Transit: Effects of BRT Station
    Land Use ImpactsCraigslist.com of Bus Rapid Transit: Effects of BRT Station Proximity on Property Values along the Pittsburgh Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway Final Report: December 2009 Report Number: FTA-FL-26-7109.2009.6 This page intentionally left blank REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND December 2009 DATES COVERED 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING Land Use Impacts of Bus Rapid Transit: NUMBERS Effects of BRT Station Proximity on Property Values along the Pittsburgh Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway FL-26-7109 6. AUTHOR(S) Victoria A. Perk, Senior Research Associate Martin Catalá, Senior Research Associate 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION National Bus Rapid Transit Institute REPORT NUMBER Center for Urban Transportation Research FL-26-7109-06 University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT100 Tampa, FL 33620 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Elk Grove City Council Staff Report
    AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.5 CITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA TITLE: Receive a report on the Bus Rapid Transit Early Implementation Study (WAM007) findings and provide direction as appropriate MEETING DATE: September 11, 2019 PREPARED BY: Bob Morrison, Transit Project Manager Michael Costa, Transit System Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD: Robert Murdoch, P.E., Public Works Director/ City Engineer RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive a report on the implementation of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) / Express Bus (ExBus) service along the existing Route 110 corridor (WAM007), and direct staff to re- evaluate BRT/ ExBus service in 2025, after additional development occurs along the corridor. During this time, staff will further explore potential grant funding opportunities, as they become available and available resources permit, for infrastructure improvements along the Route 110 corridor that could be developed to support future higher frequency transit service. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: Based on the analysis conducted in the BRT/ExBus feasibility study, ridership forecasts and farebox recovery projections resulting from the implementation of either BRT/ExBus supporting infrastructure and/or ExBus service within the Route 110 corridor would not meet both the City’s adopted 2017 Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) service performance metrics and other relevant industry-standard targets in the near-term (FY 2020). However, should future land use development densities increase along the corridor (including the redevelopment
    [Show full text]