DOCSLIB.ORG

Title Vi Program in Compliance with Fta Circular 4702.1B

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Title Vi Program in Compliance with Fta Circular 4702.1B TITLE VI PROGRAM IN COMPLIANCE WITH FTA CIRCULAR 4702.1B January 2020 The Council’s mission is to foster efficient and economic growth for a prosperous metropolitan region. Metropolitan Council Members Charlie Zelle Chair Raymond Zeran District 9 Judy Johnson District 1 Peter Lindstrom District 10 Reva Chamblis District 2 Susan Vento District 11 Christopher Ferguson District 3 Francisco J. Gonzalez District 12 Deb Barber District 4 Chai Lee District 13 Molly Cummings District 5 Kris Fredson District 14 Lynnea Atlas-Ingebretson District 6 Phillip Sterner District 15 Robert Lilligren District 7 Wendy Wulff District 16 Abdirahman Muse District 8 The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning organization for the seven-county Twin Cities area. The Council operates the regional bus and rail system, collects and treats wastewater, coordinates regional water resources, plans and helps fund regional parks, and administers federal funds that provide housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. The 17-member Council board is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the governor. This publication printed on recycled paper. On request, this publication will be made available in alternative formats to people with disabilities. Call Metropolitan Council information at 651-602-1140 or TTY 651-291-0904. Page - 2 Metropolitan Council Title VI Program Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Metropolitan Council.............................................................................................................................. 6 Metro Transit ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Other Transportation Services ........................................................................................................... 6 Title VI Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 7 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 8 Part 1: General Requirements ............................................................................................................. 11 Title VI Notice and Complaint Procedures ....................................................................................... 11 Title VI Investigations, Complaints, and Lawsuits ............................................................................ 13 Public Engagement.......................................................................................................................... 14 Language Assistance Plan .............................................................................................................. 29 Minority Representation on Planning and Advisory Bodies ............................................................. 32 Subrecipient Monitoring ................................................................................................................... 33 Facility Siting ................................................................................................................................... 34 Part 2: Fixed Route Transit Provider Requirements ............................................................................ 38 Demographic Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 38 Demographic Profiles of Ridership and Travel Patterns .................................................................. 49 Service and Fare Equity Analyses ................................................................................................... 57 System-Wide Service Standards and Policies ................................................................................. 61 Service Frequency ........................................................................................................................... 64 Service Monitoring Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 71 Part 3: Metropolitan Planning Organization Requirements ................................................................. 73 Planning Area Demographics .......................................................................................................... 73 Incorporation of Title VI Principles in Regional Planning ................................................................. 75 Distribution of State and Federal Funds .......................................................................................... 76 Distribution of FTA Funds to Subrecipients ..................................................................................... 78 Attachment A: Title VI Notices ............................................................................................................. 80 Attachment B: Title VI Complaint Form ............................................................................................... 83 Attachment C: Public Engagement Plan ............................................................................................. 88 Attachment D: Transportation Public Participation Plan ...................................................................... 99 Attachment E: Language Assistance Plan ........................................................................................ 118 Attachment F: Minutes Noting Metropolitan Council Approval of Title VI Policies ............................ 170 Attachment G: Approved Service and Fare Equity Analyses ............................................................ 176 Attachment H: Approved Service Monitoring Evaluation ................................................................... 289 Attachment I: Minutes Noting Metropolitan Council Approval of Title VI Program ............................ 367 List of Figures Figure 1: Metro Transit Service ............................................................................................................... 39 Figure 2: Metro Transit Service and Percent Minority Population ........................................................... 40 Figure 3: Metro Transit Service and Percent Low-Income Population .................................................... 41 Figure 4: Existing Facilities and Percent Minority Population ................................................................. 43 Figure 5: Existing Facilities and Percent Low-Income Population .......................................................... 44 Figure 6: Recent and Planned Facilities and Percent Minority Population ............................................. 47 Figure 7: Recent and Planned Facilities and Percent Low-Income Population ...................................... 48 Figure 8: Race and Ethnicity ................................................................................................................... 50 Figure 9: Annual Household Income....................................................................................................... 50 Page - 3 Metropolitan Council Title VI Program Figure 10: Language Spoken at Home ................................................................................................... 51 Figure 11: Ability to Speak English ......................................................................................................... 51 Figure 12: Mode of Access ..................................................................................................................... 52 Figure 13: Mode of Access (Detail) ......................................................................................................... 52 Figure 14: Mode of Egress...................................................................................................................... 53 Figure 15: Mode of Egress (Detail) ......................................................................................................... 53 Figure 16: Trip Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 54 Figure 17: Number of Transfers per One-Way Trip ................................................................................ 55 Figure 18: Riders with a Driver’s License ............................................................................................... 55 Figure 19: Fare Payment Method ........................................................................................................... 56 Figure 20: Fare Type .............................................................................................................................. 56 Figure 21: Minority Population within the MPO Planning Area ............................................................... 74 Figure 22: Low-Income Population within the MPO Planning Area ........................................................ 75 Figure 23: 2020-2023 TIP Projects and Percent Minority Population ..................................................... 77 List of Tables Table 1: Limited English Proficiency Speakers in the Metro Transit Service Area ................................. 30 Table 2: Committee and Advisory Board Demographics ........................................................................ 32
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Station Area Plan
    Brooklyn Park Station Area Plan Brooklyn Park, Minnesota | July 2016 ELECTED OFFICIALS HENNEPIN COUNTY, DEPT OF COMMU- COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP Jennifer Schultz Brooklyn Park Station NITY WORKS AND DEPT OF PLANNING Commissioner Mike Opat Sherry Anderson Albert Smith Darlene Walser Hennepin County, District 1 Cherno Bah Area Plan Bottineau Community Works Ben Stein Mayor Jeffrey Lunde Program Manager Susan Blood * Robert Timperley City of Brooklyn Park Denise Butler * Robin Turner Andrew Gillett Kimberly Carpenter Tonja West-Hafner Peter Crema Principal Planning Analyst Reva Chamblis Council Member, City of Brooklyn Jim White PREPARED FOR Denise Engen Park, East District Daniel Couture Jane Wilson City of Brooklyn Park Principal Planning Analyst Rebecca Dougherty Carol Woehrer Hennepin County Rich Gates Council Member, City of Brooklyn Brent Rusco Janet Durbin Yaomee Xiong * Park, Central District Administrative Engineer Michael Fowler FUNDED BY Kathy Fraser HEALTH EQUITY & ENGAGEMENT Hennepin County John Jordan Karen Nikolai COHORT Teferi Fufa Council Member, City of Brooklyn Administrative Manager African American Leadership Park, West District Jeffrey Gagnon Forum (AALF) CONSULTANT TEAM Joseph Gladke Larry Glover African Career & Education Urban Design Associates Terry Parks Assistant Department Director Resources (ACER) Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Council Member, City of Brooklyn Edmond Gray SB Friedman Development Advisors Park, East District Dan Hall Alliance for Metropolitan Stability CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK (AMS) ZAN Associates Heidi Heinzel Mike Trepanier Kim Berggren Asamblea de Derechos Civiles Westly Henrickson Council Member, City of Brooklyn Director of Community CAPI USA Park, Central District Development Shaquonica Johnson LAO Assistance Center of Michael Kisch Bob Mata Cindy Sherman Minnesota (LAC) Council Member, City of Brooklyn Planning Director Tim Korby Minnesota African Women’s Park, West District Chris Kurle Association (MAWA) Todd A.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Forest Lake 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2018
    DRAFT City of Forest Lake 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2018 Table of Contents I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 Vision and Goals .................................................................................................... 1 Background/History of the Community ............................................................... 2 Purpose of the Plan ............................................................................................... 3 Process ................................................................................................................... 3 Regional Setting .................................................................................................... 3 II. Land Use .............................................................................................................................. 6 Land Use Goals and Objectives ............................................................................. 6 Forecasts and Current Demographics .................................................................. 7 Existing Land Use ................................................................................................. 10 Future Land Use .................................................................................................. 15 Natural Resources ............................................................................................... 24 Special Resource Protection ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bass Lake Road Station Area Plan
    Bass Lake Road Station Area Plan Crystal, Minnesota | July 2016 ELECTED OFFICIALS Brent Rusco African Career & Education Jason Zimmerman Michael Mechtenberg Bass Lake Road Station Commissioner Mike Opat Administrative Engineer Resources (ACER) City of Golden Valley Metro Transit Hennepin County, District 1 Karen Nikolai Alliance for Metropolitan Stability Rebecca Farrar Shelley Miller Area Plan (AMS) Mayor Jim Adams Administrative Manager City of Minneapolis Metro Transit City of Crystal Joseph Gladke La Asamblea de Derechos Civiles Beth Grosen Alicia Vap Laura Libby Assistant Department Director CAPI USA City of Minneapolis Metro Transit Council Member, City of Crystal, PREPARED FOR LAO Assistance Center of Ward 1 and 2 Don Pflaum Mike Larson City of Crystal CITY OF CRYSTAL Minnesota (LAC) City of Minneapolis Metropolitan Council Hennepin County Elizabeth Dahl John Sutter Minnesota African Women’s Council Member, City of Crystal, Community Development Director Association (MAWA) Jim Voll Eric Wojchik Ward 1 City of Minneapolis Metropolitan Council FUNDED BY Minnesota Center for Neighborhood Dan Olson Organization (MCNO) Hennepin County Jeff Kolb Rick Pearson Jan Youngquist City Planner Nexus Community Partners Council Member, City of Crystal, City of Robbinsdale Metropolitan Council Northwest Human Services Council CONSULTANT TEAM Ward 2 COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP (NHHSC) Chad Ellos Adam Arvidson Urban Design Associates Olga Parsons Gene Bakke Hennepin County Minneapolis Park and Recreation Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Council Member,
    [Show full text]
  • Locally Preferred Alternative
    Locally Preferred Alternative Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 1 Riverview Corridor Study Area • 12 mile study area between Saint Paul and Bloomington. • Connects major destinations, neighborhoods and job concentrations. • Serves growing and diverse population and employment areas. • 50,600 residents and 123,900 jobs. • Provides regional and local connectivity. Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 2 Study Process Completed August 2015 Completed August 2017 December, 2017 CORRIDOR VISION ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE • Current and future • Initial Screening. • Vehicle and route conditions. (completed February 2016) of Locally Preferred • Review of relevant work. • Detailed Definition. Alternative. • Purpose and need. • Detailed Evaluation. • Implementation Plan. March – August 2017 • Goals and objectives. Public Engagement • Examined 60 different alternatives. • Engaged over 4,600 people via nearly 100 events responding to nearly individual 650 comments. Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 3 Community Engagement More than 4,600 people participated in the Riverview Study through community events including open houses, business outreach, presentations, pop-up events, social media, and online engagement forms. Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 4 What We Heard • Rail transit’s ease of use is preferred. • Transit system connectivity, e.g. to airport. • Transit saves employees cost of parking • Concern about business and neighborhood impacts. • Keep Ford Site in mind throughout the study. • Route 54: Good service frequency, but crowded. • Improve transit service – frequent, fast, reliable. Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 5 Community Input has Shaped the Process • Purpose and need for transit improvements. • Goals and objectives. • Routes and vehicles to study • Potential station locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Open House METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) Phase 1: Station Area Planning Welcome! November 12Th, 2014 5:30-8:00 P.M
    COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE METRO Blue Line extension (Bottineau LRT) Phase 1: Station Area Planning Welcome! November 12th, 2014 5:30-8:00 p.m. Agenda: 5:30 - Refreshments and Visit » Information Displays » Penn Avenue Community Works Open House Map: » METRO Blue Line Extension GOLDEN VAN WHITE VALLEY BLVD. » C-Line Arterial Bus Rapid Transit ROAD STATION DISCUSSION STATION TABLES 6:00 - Welcome FOOD STATION FOOD STATION 6:10 - Open House Introduction PLYMOUTH PENN AVE. AVE. STATION STATION 6:20 - Station Area Exercises PENN AVE. COMMUNITY WORKS 8:00 - Meeting Closes WHAT IS STATION AREA PLANNING? METRO BLUE LINE C-LINE ARTERIAL Rest Rooms BUS RAPID TRANSIT WELCOME EXTENSION Enter Front Here Door Reception Desk Station Area Planning What is a station area plan? » Plan for the area that surrounds a proposed transit station Proposed » ½ mile radius and/or 10 min. walk Station » Community-based » Focus is on maintaining great neighborhoods and high quality transit-oriented development. » Creates a plan that supports Light Rail Transit by looking at: » Land uses and types/character of buildings » Access/circulation (bike, walk, car, bus) » Improvements to public spaces, including streets/trails Plans will make recommendations on: » Future land use alternatives » Housing (preservation and new) » Potential markets for new development » Circulation and access improvements » Strategies for health equity » Implementation measures such as zoning changes, comprehensive plan amendments and other ordinances or policies Implemented by the cities, county and
    [Show full text]
  • Minneapolis Transportation Action Plan (Engagement Phase 3)
    Minneapolis Transportation Action Plan (Engagement Phase 3) Email Comment Topic Comment # The recommendations in this submission expand on this principle and support the overall Transportation Action Plan goals of designing transportation to achieve the aims of Minneapolis 2040, address climate change, reduce traffic fatalities and injuries, and improve racial and economic equity. In line with these goals, our most significant recommendations for the Prospect Park area are to • Invest in the protected bike network: extending the Greenway over the River, and building the Prospect Park Trail along railroad right-of- way • Transform University Avenue and Washington Avenues • Complete the Grand Rounds and use the Granary corridor to redirect truck traffic Priorities for transportation improvements in Prospect Park 1. Improve pedestrian infrastructure throughout the community including safe crossings of University Avenue SE (Bedford, Malcolm, 29th and 27th), Franklin Avenue SE (Bedford, Seymour) and 27th Avenue SE (Essex, Luxton Park to Huron pedestrian overpass). We encourage the city to narrow residential intersections, particularly in Bicycling, the Tower Hill sub-neighborhood where streets do not meet at right Walking, 1 angles, and crossing distances are significantly longer than needed. Additional Planters and plastic delineators could be used to achieve this ahead of Comments reconstruction. Maintenance and improvements should focus on public safety, adequate lighting and landscape upkeep. Throughout the neighborhood residents have cited safety (particularly at night), sidewalk disrepair, narrowness, snow and ice issues, and have expressed support for full ADA compliance. 2. Complete the Minneapolis Grand Rounds and the Granary Corridor (see Map 2) to enhance community access to city and regional parks and trails as well as to adjoining neighborhoods.
    [Show full text]
  • Arterial Transitway Corridors Study Final Report
    Arterial Transitway Corridors Study April 2012 Prepared by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Connetics Transportation Group Luken Architecture CR Planning April 2012 Final Report i CONTENTS Table of Contents Introduction to the Arterial Transitway Corridors Study ................................................................................................ 1 Why were these corridors selected for study? ......................................................................................................................................................2 What problems does the study address? (Purpose and Need) .........................................................................................................................3 What is Arterial Bus Rapid Transit? ........................................................................................................................................................................4 Study Goals and Objectives .....................................................................................................................................................................................5 What was studied in the ATCS?......................................................................................................................................... 7 Physical Concept Plans ............................................................................................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • AGENDA Rush Line Corridor Task Force Meeting February 18 at 4:30 P.M
    AGENDA Rush Line Corridor Task Force Meeting February 18 at 4:30 p.m. Virtual Meeting via Zoom Web access / call‐in instructions to be sent separately Item: Action Requested: Chair Victoria Reinhardt 1. Call to Order/Introductions Chair Victoria Reinhardt 2. Approval of the Agenda Approval Chair Victoria Reinhardt 3. Summary of July 23, 2020 Meeting Approval All 4. Member Updates Discussion Frank Alarcon, Ramsey County 5. State and Federal Legislative Update Information Public Works 6. 2021 Draft Workplan and Budget Andy Gitzlaff, Ramsey County Information Public Works Andy Gitzlaff, Ramsey County 7. Rush Line BRT Project Update Information Public Works Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13D.021 and 13D.04 Subd. 3, the Chair of the Rush Line Corridor Task Force has determined that an in‐person meeting is not practical or prudent because of the COVID‐19 pandemic and the declared state and local emergencies. Committee members will participate by telephone or other electronic means. In addition, it may not be feasible to have any committee members, staff or members of the public present at the regular meeting location due to the COVID‐19 pandemic and the declared emergencies. The meeting broadcast will be available online and a link to view the broadcast can be obtained by registering here. Members of the public and the media will be able to watch the public meeting live online. For questions related to this material, please contact Andy Gitzlaff at 651‐266‐2772 or [email protected]. Rush Line Corridor Task Force – February 18, 2021 1 Agenda Item #3 Rush Line Corridor Task Force Meeting July 23, 2020, 4:30 – 6:00 pm via ZOOM Draft Meeting Summary MEMBERS: Tom Fischer, Little Canada Councilmember Ben Montzka, Chisago County Commissioner John Mikrot, Pine County Commissioner D.
    [Show full text]
  • November 15, 2017 the Honorable Paul
    This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp November 15, 2017 The Honorable Paul Torkelson, Chair The Honorable Scott Newman, Chair House Transportation Finance Committee Senate Transportation Finance & Policy Committee 381 State Office Building 3105 Minnesota Senate Building Saint Paul, MN 55155 Saint Paul, MN 55155 The Honorable Linda Runbeck, Chair The Honorable Scott Dibble House Transportation & Regional Governance Policy Ranking Minority Member Committee Senate Transportation Finance & Policy Committee 417 State Office Building 2213 Minnesota Senate Building Saint Paul, MN 55155 Saint Paul, MN 55155 The Honorable Frank Hornstein, DFL Lead The Honorable Connie Bernardy, DFL Lead House Transportation Policy & Finance Committee House Transportation & Regional Governance Policy 243 State Office Building Committee Saint Paul, MN 55155 253 State Office Building Saint Paul, MN 55155 RE: 2017 Guideway Status report Dear Legislators: The Minnesota Department of Transportation, in collaboration with the Metropolitan Council, is pleased to provide the 2017 Guideway Status report as required under 2016 Minnesota Statutes 174.93, subdivision 2. This report updates information for eight guideway corridors currently in operation, construction or design, and thirteen more that are in planning or analysis phase, or that were at the time of the last report in 2015. The capacity analysis looks at regional guideway funding needs and resources related to capital, operations and capital maintenance for the next ten years. If you have specific questions about this report or want additional information, please contact MnDOT’s Brian Isaacson at [email protected] or at 651 234-7783; or, you can contact Met Council’s Cole Hiniker at [email protected] or at 651 602-1748.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation, Urban Design, and the Environment 2003
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. CTS 03-04 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Transportation, Urban Design and the Environment: January 18, 2003 Highway 61/Red Rock Corridor 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Lance M. Neckar 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. Department of Landscape Architecture University of Minnesota 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. 1425 University Ave S.E. Room 115 Minneapolis, MN 55414 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation 395 John Ireland Boulevard Mail Stop 330 14. Sponsoring Agency Code St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words) This report is a combination of two reports (Task 1 and Task 2 and 3) on the Highway 61/Red Rock Commuter Rail Corridor. The Task 1 portion describes the baseline conditions related to subdivision-scaled growth in the corridor, with particular concentration on Cottage Grove, one of the station sites. Also considered are current plans for the downtown St. Paul Union Depot. The Task 2 and 3 portion focuses on issues relating to the relationship between transportation and the environment. An important issue in this study, therefore, is the design and institutional integration of objectives across investments in transit services at a regional scale, public space, and the long-term value of developed private space, especially in suburbia. The report offers designs for new, alternative patterns of regional growth, both urban and suburban, in broad corridors served by commuter rail service.
    [Show full text]
  • Gold Line Joint Powers Board Agenda
    GOLD LINE JOINT POWERS BOARD AGENDA Wednesday, April 28, 2021 11:00 A.M. Call: 1-404-397-1516 Access Code: 177 393 4974 Password: GoldLine2021! Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, board members and staff are conducting this meeting electronically. Members of the public who wish to share their comments or concerns may email [email protected] or by telephone at 651-430-4300. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. ACTION ITEMS - a. Meeting Agenda b. March 24, 2021 Meeting Minutes * c. Resolution 2021-04- Approving the Use of Grant Funds for Pre-Award Authority Expenditures for Right-of-Way Acquisition and Relocation * d. Resolution 2021-05 - Approving the Use of Grant Funds for Pre-Award Authority Expenditures for Advanced Utility Relocation (AUR) * e. Resolution 2021-06 - Approval of the Gold Line BRT Cost, Budget, Scope and Schedule at 60% Design * f. Resolution 2021-07 - Approval of Amendment #1 to the Gold Line Joint Powers Agreement * IV. INFORMATION ITEMS - a. METRO Gold Line Update b. Joint Powers Board Financial Update c. Communications and Legislative Update * d. Next Meeting – May 26, 2021, 10:30 AM-12:00 PM, Electronic Meeting V. ADJOURNMENT * Attachments 1 GOLD LINE JOINT POWERS BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION AGENDA ITEM NO. III b. GOLD LINE JOINT POWERS BOARD DRAFT MINUTES Wednesday, March 24, 2021 CALL TO ORDER Chair McDonough called to order the Gold Line Joint Powers Board (JPB) meeting at 10:35 a.m. Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, board members and staff conducted the meeting virtually via WebEx.
    [Show full text]
  • Metro Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit Environmental Assessment
    BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Environmental Assessment Appendix A Technical Report Purpose and Need September 2019 Purpose and Need Technical Report CONTENTS METRO Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit Project CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................. 1-iii 1. Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1. Project Description ............................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1.1. Project Location ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1.2. Project Setting ........................................................................................................................... 1-3 1.1.3. Regional Transit System ........................................................................................................... 1-5 1.2. Project Background ........................................................................................................... 1-8 1.2.1. Policy Direction and Prior Planning ........................................................................................... 1-8 1.2.2. Environmental Review Process ................................................................................................ 1-9 1.3. Purpose and Need ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]