DOCSLIB.ORG

Streetcar Plan Posters

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

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. envisioned. BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Making Bicycling an Integral Part of Daily Life in Portland Bicycle Master Plan City of Portland Office of Transportation As a result of the plan, the number of bikeway miles in Portland has more than tripled. In 1996, the City adopted the current Bicycle Master Plan. It envisioned a citywide As the next generation of facilities is constructed, more and more Portlanders are likely bikeway network, with detailed implementation strategies and design guidelines. to view the bicycle as a viable transportation option. In 1990, the “Northwest Triangle” district In 1995, city planners unveiled the River District consisted mainly of underutilized and abandoned Urban Design Plan, which envisioned a mixed Today, the area has been transformed to the Pearl District, home to parks, locally-owned warehouses and rairoad spurs. use urban neighborhood. businesses, o#ce buildings, and thousands of residents. Streetcar System Plan HISTORIC PERSPECTIVE 1918 STREETCAR SYSTEM MAP HISTORIC HIGHLIGHTS In 1919, there were: • 100,301,793 total passengers carried by streetcar lines. • 197.17 miles of track. • 15,668,670 streetcar miles run. • An average route length of 4.7 miles. MODERN HIGHLIGHTS Modern Streetcar: • Connects walkable neighborhoods. • Is a strategic development tool. • Had 4.3 million riders in 2008. • Has 4.1 route miles of track. ! Streetcar System Plan THE MISSION OF THE STREETCAR SYSTEM PLAN It is the mission of the Streetcar System Plan to identify an interconnected system of streetcar corridors that are integrated with the City’s transportation and land use network. The Portland Streetcar System Plan plays a key role in shaping the City by promoting walkable neighborhoods; vibrant main streets that encourage sustainable development; infrastructure that reduces vehicle trips; and greater accessibility that includes housing options, employment and economic development. Green Streetcar Corridor Vision Solar Energy Active Green Roofs with Buildings step down to single family residential Solar Collection Inviting and Active Neighborhood Places Green Buildings Green Roof Green Roof t Green Roof t h g gh Li Li Single Family Residential Mixed Use Residential Green Mixed Use Residential with Residential Local Single Family Residential Neighborhood with Ground Floor Streetcar Street Employment and Green Street Neighborhood Active Uses Ground Floor Active Uses Green Streetcar Streets Mixed Use Development Green Streets Transitions to Residential Streetcar Service Place Making Pedestrian Friendly Complement Character Pedestrian Priority Ground Floor Active Uses: Bicycle Connectivity Mixed Use Scale: SMART Systems: • Restaurants, Shops and Stormwater Management • Step Down Buildings • Way Finding Neighborhood Services Access for All • Reduce Building Mass • Interpretive Information Employment Over Active Uses: • Residential Scale Entries • Trip Planning • O! ces and Services Protect Solar Exposure Bicycle Connectivity • Residential on Top Stormwater Management Alternative Energy Access for All LEED Certi" ed Thermal Energy Distribution " Streetcar System Plan GOALS OF THE STREETCAR SYSTEM PLAN SIX GOALS OF THE STREETCAR SYSTEM PLAN PROJECT Mayor Sam Adams and the Streetcar System Project team have identi" ed six goals for the project – three for the development of the overall streetcar system plan and three for the evaluation of potential streetcar corridors. A Successful Streetcar System will: • Help the City achieve its peak oil and sustainability strategies. • Provide an organizing structure and catalyst for the City’s future growth along streetcar corridors. • Integrate Streetcar corridors into the City’s existing neighborhoods. Successful Streetcar Corridors need to: • Be a viable transit option with adequate ridership. • Have redevelopment potential. • Demonstrate community support to make the changes necessary for a successful streetcar corridor. # Streetcar System Plan PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT CITY WIDE STREETCAR SYSTEM PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING LAND USE PLANNING COMMUNITY LEADERS URBAN DESIGN LOCAL BUSINESSES TRANSIT PLANNING NEIGHBORS CIVIL ENGINEERING LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT System Advisory Streetcar Committee System Plan PROJECT (CITIZENS) Project Team MILESTONES (PM) District Working Groups Development Oriented Transit Team PORTLAND OFFICE OF TRANSPORTATION (PDOT) TRIMET BUREAU OF PLANNING METRO PORTLAND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (PDC) OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (ODOT) PM PM PM PM POTENTIAL STREETCAR DRAFT STREETCAR IMPLEMENTATION FINAL STREETCAR SYSTEM CORRIDOR AND SYSTEM SYSTEM PLAN STUDY PLAN TO PLANNING EVALUATION COMMISSION / CITY COUNCIL SPRING 2008 SPRING 2009 SPRING 2009 SUMMER 2009 PUBLIC MEETINGS PUBLIC MEETINGS (MAY 2009) DISTRICT WORKING GROUPS March 2009 ROLES IN THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS District Working Groups To assess support for potential streetcar corridors through the city, citizen-led District Working Groups (DWG) were formed by the City of Portland Bureau of Transportation (BOT) Streetcar System Plan (SSP) project team. Representing ! ve districts of the city, citizen-led District Working Groups were asked to discuss and share their thoughts on streetcars and their potential in" uence on urban corridors in the districts where they live and work. The System Advisory Committee (SAC) The SAC is a geographically, ethnically, and generationally diverse group of people who represent the broader community and who are interested in a streetcar system in Portland. The committee maintains a big picture understanding of the Streetcar System Plan and has provided community input throughout the project to the Development Oriented Transit Team (DOTT). As the project progressed, the SAC interacted closely with the District Working Groups and represented their perspectives to the DOTT. Ultimately, they will work with the Portland O# ce of Transportation, Mayor Adams’ O# ce, and the DOTT to present the plan and recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council. The Project Team The Portland O# ce of Transportation is the lead agency and has contracted with a consultant team led by URS to support City sta$ . The Development Oriented Transit Team (DOTT) The Development Oriented Transit Team brings the perspectives of cooperating agencies and bureaus to guide the planning process and make sure the project is aligned with agency/bureau objectives and plans. The Portland O# ce of Transportation is the lead agency. Streetcar System Plan TECHNOLOGY COMPARISON HOW DOES STREETCAR COMPARE TO BUSES AND LIGHT RAIL? Streetcar, bus and light rail are the primary transit vehicles operating in Portland. The table below, which compares the operational characteristics of the three modes, illustrates streetcar’s unique ability to combine the bene" ts of bus and light rail. Portland Transit Vehicle Type Streetcar Light Rail Transit (LRT) Bus (low-floor) Vehicle Length 66 feet long 92 feet long 40 feet long 8 feet wide 8.5 feet wide 8.5 feet wide Power Source Overhead wire Overhead wire Diesel engine Passenger Entry Partial low floors, Partial low floors, Partial low floors, Doors on both sides Doors on both sides Door on one side Passenger Boarding Convenient and accessible Convenient and accessible Convenient and accessible boarding boarding boarding Passenger Capacity 30 seats 64 seats 39 seats 51 standees 69 standees 12 standees 81 total 133 total 51 total (266 per train) 110 total “crush design”* 64 total “crush design”* 166 total “crush design”* Amenities Space for wheelchairs, Space for wheelchairs, Space for wheelchairs and bikes, strollers, etc. bikes, strollers, etc. bikes Expected Vehicle 30 Years 30-35 Years 15 Years Lifespan Cost per Vehicle $2.9 Million $3.8 Million $400,000 * or total “design crush load” BUS STREETCAR LRT $ Streetcar System Plan THE BENEFITS OF
Recommended publications
  • Union Station Conceptual Engineering Study

    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
  • White Paper: Urban Application of Aerial Cableway Technology

    White Paper: Urban Application of Aerial Cableway Technology

    WHITE PAPER: URBAN APPLICATION OF AERIAL CABLEWAY TECHNOLOGY WSP USA | June 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WSP USA is pleased to present the following white paper that summarizes the benefits and items for consideration of aerial cableway technology; outlines the project development process; and addresses advantages, costs and challenges associated with developing aerial cableway systems in urban environments. Urban applications of aerial cableway technology have been successfully integrated into transit networks in numerous cities around the globe, including the Portland Aerial Tram (Portland, Oregon) and Roosevelt Island Tram (New York, NY). Interest in aerial cableway technology has grown considerably in the United States in recent years, and initial feasibility studies have been completed in several U.S. cities, including San Diego, CA; Washington DC; and Brooklyn, NY. WSP is evaluating aerial cableway technology as an innovative first- and last-mile connection to regional transit in urban areas. Aerial cableway technology offers multiple benefits, including: relatively lower costs compared to other transportation modes, the ability to overcome significant changes in topography and other obstacles in natural and man-made environments, the ability to bypass congested roadways and transportation corridors, the ability to move high volumes of passengers: the equivalent of one city bus every minute, a streamlined design that fits into the urban environment, the potential to integrate transit-oriented development (TOD) near stations, and the ability to provide service between residential areas and key destinations. Many of these benefits have been realized in existing systems in La Paz, Bolivia, and Medellin, Colombia. Specifically, Medellin’s Line K transports more than 40,000 passengers per day between residential areas and the city center, reducing some commute times from more than an hour to approximately 10 minutes.
  • 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

    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.
  • UNECE Tram and Metro Statistics Metadata Introduction File Structure

    UNECE Tram and Metro Statistics Metadata Introduction File Structure

    UNECE Tram and Metro Statistics Metadata Introduction This file gives detailed country notes on the UNECE tram and metro statistics dataset. These metadata describe how countries have compiled tram and metro statistics, what the data cover, and where possible how passenger numbers and passenger-km have been determined. Whether data are based on ticket sales, on-board sensors or another method may well affect the comparability of passenger numbers across systems and countries, hence it being documented here. Most of the data are at the system level, allowing comparisons across cities and systems. However, not every country could provide this, sometimes due to confidentiality reasons. In these cases, sometimes either a regional figure (e.g. the Provinces of Canada, which mix tram and metro figures with bus and ferry numbers) or a national figure (e.g. Czechia trams, which excludes the Prague tram system) have been given to maximise the utility of the dataset. File Structure The disseminated file is structured into seven different columns, as follows: Countrycode: These are United Nations standard country codes for statistical use, based on M49. The codes together with the country names, region and other information are given here https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/overview/ (and can be downloaded as a CSV directly here https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/overview/#). City: This column gives the name of the city or region where the metro or tram system operates. In many cases, this is sufficient to identify the system. In some cases, non-roman character names have been converted to roman characters for convenience.
  • 2015 DRAFT Park SDC Capital Plan 150412.Xlsx

    2015 DRAFT Park SDC Capital Plan 150412.Xlsx

    2015 PARK SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE 20‐YEAR CAPITAL PLAN (SUMMARY) April 2015 As required by ORS 223.309 Portland Parks and Recreation maintains a list of capacity increasing projects intended to TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT INCREASE CAPACITY: address the need created by growth. These projects are eligible to be funding with Park SDC revenue . The total value of Land acquisition projects summarized below exceeds the potential revenue of $552 million estimated by the 2015 Park SDC Methodology and Develop new parks on new land the funding from non-SDC revenue targeted for growth projects. Expand existing recreation facilities, trails, play areas, picnic areas, etc The project list and capital plan is a "living" document that, per ORS 223.309 (2), maybe modified at anytime. It should be Increase playability, durability and life of facilities noted that potential modifications to the project list will not impact the fee since the fee is not based on the project list, but Develop and improve parks to withstand more intense and extended use rather the level of service established by the adopted Park SDC Methodology. Construct new or expand existing community centers, aquatic facilities, and maintenance facilities Increase capacity of existing community centers, aquatic facilities, and maintenance facilities ELIGIBLE PROJECTS POTENTIAL REVENUE TOTAL PARK SDC ELIGIBLE CAPACITY INCREASING PROJECTS 20‐year Total SDC REVENUE CATEGORY SDC Funds Other Revenue Total 2015‐35 TOTAL Park SDC Eligible City‐Wide Capacity Increasing Projects 566,640,621 City‐Wide
  • Public Meeting Presentation 130826.Pptx

    Public Meeting Presentation 130826.Pptx

    Proposed Long-Term Streetcar Network Study Overview/Purpose § Examine the feasibility of streetcar service in Saint Paul § Determine where it would work best § Determine where to start 2 What is Streetcar Service? Consists of many elements: Vehicles Stops Right-of-Way Short Stop Spacing Fare Payment New Development Streetcar Vehicles • Modern, vintage, or replica of vintage streetcar • Usually single vehicle Modern Streetcar, Toronto Modern Streetcar, Portland Modern Streetcar, Seattle Modern Streetcar, Tacoma Vintage Streetcar, Memphis Historic Replica Streetcar, New Orleans Streetcars in the Street • Usually operate in mixed-traffic • But can also operate in exclusive rights-of-way Portland Streetcar Seattle Streetcar Tucson Streetcar (Planned) San Francisco F-Line Portland Streetcar Kansas City Streetcar (Planned) Streetcar Route Length & Stop Spacing • Short lengths; focus on shorter more local trips • Frequent stops; approximately every two blocks 2.8 miles 2.1miles Portland Streetcar Kansas City Streetcar (Planned) Streetcar Stops Smaller scale/less elaborate than LRT stations Portland Streetcar Stop Seattle Streetcar Stop Toronto Streetcar Stop Future Westgate Light Rail Station, St. Paul Economic Development Patterns Streetcar Light Rail • Linear economic development • Nodal economic development South Lake Union Streetcar, Seattle The Lyric near the future Raymond Ave Station, St. Paul Construction Impacts Streetcar Light Rail • Lower impact • Greater impact • Faster construction • Longer construction First Hill Streetcar construction,
  • The Path to Partnership: How Cities and Transit Systems Can Stop

    The Path to Partnership: How Cities and Transit Systems Can Stop

    The Path to Partnership: How Cities and Transit Systems Can Stop Worrying and Join Forces Introduction In order to keep and attract riders, transit must be frequent, fast, and reliable. Maintaining frequent, fast, and reliable service in the congested conditions of most American cities requires prioritizing street level transit above automobile traffic, through measures like bus lanes, queue jumps, and signal priority. Relative to large capital projects, bus priority measures provide immediate improvements in travel time and reliability at a small fraction of the cost, and can be accomplished overnight with the right combination of paint, light duty street installations, and enforcement. The projects profiled in this study, including a bus lane in Everett, MA, New York City’s Select Bus Service, and Seattle’s Rapid Ride have seen travel time savings of 10-30%. While on-street transit improvements can be done quickly and cheaply, they aren’t necessarily easy to accomplish. Getting them done usually requires two things: · Political will and leadership from mayors, transit system managers and board members, and other leaders who must be willing to defend potentially controversial street and service changes like removing on-street parking spaces for a bus lane, or eliminating bus stops that are too close together. · Structuring transit agencies and city street agencies to more quickly and effectively deliver on-street transit projects. This may mean forging new relationships and decision-making processes, gathering new data, hiring for different skills, and figuring out new ways to prioritize projects. 2 Transit street projects can be tough to get done when there’s no history of doing them.
  • Light Rail Transit (LRT) ♦Rapid ♦Streetcar

    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
  • CITY of SEATTLE Center City Connector Streetcar

    CITY of SEATTLE Center City Connector Streetcar

    CITY OF SEATTLE Improvement of: Center City Connector Streetcar, Advance Utility Package Phase 2 (FTA) FA#: ___ PW#: 2017-066 Funded by: Federal Transit Administration, Seattle Public Utilities Bids Open : December 13, 2017 Advertisement for Bids City of Seattle Center City Connector Streetcar, Advance Utility Package Phase 2 (FTA) Bid Opening Date: December 13, 2017 at 2:00 pm PW #: 2017-066 THIS PROJECT IS FEDERALLY FUNDED This Contract, as noted herein, is funded, in part, by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. This project is subject to the requirements set forth by the FTA Master Agreement. The remaining work is funded by local funding source and is not subject to the requirements set forth by FTA Master Agreement. PROJECT LOCATION: Downtown Seattle on 1st Avenue from Stewart Street to Madison Street, and Stewart Street from Westlake Avenue to 1st Avenue. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of utility improvements including water, sewer, drainage, and electrical power distribution. Water improvements include the removal of existing cast iron water main and appurtenances and replacement with a new ductile iron water main, including valves, hydrants and water services. This work is identified under bid schedule SPU Water. Sewer improvements consist of maintenance hole riser reconstruction, sewer lateral spot repairs, and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) lining in the sewer mainline on 1st Avenue from Seneca Street to Spring Street. This work has been identified under bid schedule SPU Sewer. SDOT Improvements include drainage improvements such as replacement of inlets, pipe, and catch basins at intersections and mid-block throughout the project corridor.
  • Coordinated Transportation Plan for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities I Table of Contents June 2020

    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 .....................................................................................................................................
  • Seattle Streetcar First Hill Line

    Seattle Streetcar First Hill Line

    SEATTLE STREETCAR FIRST HILL LINE Operations & Maintenance Plan v 03 February 2012 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................................................2 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE.......................................................................................................3 2. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION......................................................................................................4 3. SERVICE PLAN..................................................................................................................9 4. OPERATIONS.................................................................................................................13 5. MAINTENANCE..............................................................................................................15 6. STAFFING & BUDGET....................................................................................................23 7. SAFETY .........................................................................................................................25 8. COMMUNICATIONS & MARKETING………………………………………………………………………….….26 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The First Hill Streetcar links First Hill employment centers to the regional transit system via connections on Capitol Hill and in the International District. The First Hill Streetcar also connects diverse and vibrant neighborhoods on Capitol Hill, First Hill, the Central Area, the Chinatown/International District, and Pioneer Square while serving medical
  • About East Portland Neighborhoods Vol

    About East Portland Neighborhoods Vol

    EAST PORTLAND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION NEWS October 2009 News about East Portland Neighborhoods vol. 14 issue 4 Your NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS Argay pg.pg. pg. pg.5 pg.6 pg. Neighborhood Association 33 4 6 12 Centennial Community Association All about East Portland Glenfair Neighborhood Association Neighborhood Association News … Hazelwood The East Portland in outer East Portland that events, graffiti cleanups, and tribution with positive, far- Neighborhood Association Neighborhood Association make up the EPNO coalition tree plantings. reaching results. News (EPNAN) isn’t a news- (our alliance individual neigh- As you look through our The volunteers of the East Lents paper in the traditional sense. borhoods) – know more paper and see how your Portland Neighbors Inc. Neighborhood Association It wasn’t created to compete about this sanctioned system neighbors are making a real Newspaper Committee thank with community, city or of neighborhood organiza- difference in their neighbor- you for taking a few minutes Mill Park national news outlets – nei- tions, recognized by City gov- hood, perhaps you’ll be to discover more about what Neighborhood Association ther in content nor for adver- ernment. encouraged by their efforts. your neighbors are doing, tisers. So, the stories and photos Then, possibly you’ll decide and how you can help outer Parkrose Heights EPNAN is the way the East you see on the pages inside to take as little as one hour a East Portland be an even Association of Neighbors Portland Neighborhood are about volunteers and month to participate in your nicer place to live when we Organization (EPNO) reach- organizations that are work- neighborhood association work together.