Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council

Similar documents
Transit Workshop with MPO Board

City of Davenport CitiBus Public Transportation Study. April 2015

2017 North Texas Regional Bicycle Opinion Survey

Pocatello Regional Transit Master Transit Plan Draft Recommendations

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study. Ave

SR 693 (Pasadena Avenue) Corridor Study from Shore Drive South to 66 th Street

2011 Countywide Attitudinal and Awareness Survey Results

TRANSIT RIDERSHIP IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL PROJECTS OPERATING PLANS - NEXT NETWORK TRANSIT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

REGIONAL HOUSEHOLD TRAVEL SURVEY:

Everett Transit Action Plan. Community Open House November 16, 2015

1999 On-Board Sacramento Regional Transit District Survey

2014 Ontario Works Transit Survey: Final Results

I-95 NEW HAVEN HARBOR CROSSING CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

I-20 East Transit Initiative. Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting September 9, :00-6:00 PM

2018 Transportation Survey October 17, Prepared by:

Nanaimo Transportation Master Plan. Phase 1 Consultation Summary

SOLTRANS BOARD MEETING SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS / HANDOUTS January 15, 2015 MEETING HANDOUTS

Data Analysis February to March Identified safety needs from reported collisions and existing travel patterns.

Purpose and Need. Chapter Introduction. 2.2 Project Purpose and Need Project Purpose Project Need

VISION Long Range Plan Update Board Workshop. February 10, 2016

PASSENGER SURVEY RESULTS

Wilshire Boulevard Bus Rapid Transit Project

Encouraging Taxi Drivers to Behave: Grafton Bridge Taxi and Bus Lane Trial. Rob Douglas-Jones Tim Segedin, Edin Ltd.

MALL CROSSING STUDY. Testing the Effectiveness Of the 4th Street East Crossing. For: City of Charlottesville Neighborhood Development Services

CITY OF ABBOTSFORD TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT MASTER PLAN

The Who and What: Bus Rapid Transit Riders and Systems in the U.S.

How familiar are you with BRT?

I-95 NEW HAVEN HARBOR CROSSING CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

February 4, Community Meeting August 2, :30 6:10 Presentation

Kitsap Transit Fast Ferry Schedule Survey

Transit Ridership - Why the Decline and How to Increase. Hosted by the. Virginia Transit Association

Dial A Lift Customer Survey 2011 Executive Summary

Capital Bikeshare 2011 Member Survey Executive Summary

Auckland Transport Monthly Indicators Report 2018/19

Transportation Trends, Conditions and Issues. Regional Transportation Plan 2030

AAMPO Regional Transportation Attitude Survey

WILMAPCO Public Opinion Survey Summary of Results

Philadelphia Bus Network Choices Report

I-95 NEW HAVEN HARBOR CROSSING CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Birmingham Connected. Edmund Salt. Transportation Policy Birmingham City Council

COMPARISON OF FIXED & VARIABLE RATES (25 YEARS) CHARTERED BANK ADMINISTERED INTEREST RATES - PRIME BUSINESS*

Providence Downtown Transit Connector STAKEHOLDER MEETING #2. Stakeholder Meeting #1 October 24, 2016

Arlington County 10-Year Transit Development Plan & Premium Transit Network Briefing. May 2016

El Paso County 2040 Major Transportation Corridors Plan

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN

WELCOME Mission-Geneva Transportation Study

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... vii 1 STUDY OVERVIEW Study Scope Study Area Study Objectives

Public Consultation Centre For. Transportation Master Plan Update. Information Package

BID Strategy Group and Stakeholders Meeting. April 17, 2018

Bay Area Council 2016 Report of Survey Results Regarding Transportation

CARTA East Cooper Transit Service Transportation Committee Town of Mount Pleasant. February 5, 2013

DKS & WASHINGTON COUNTY Washington County Transportation Survey

Wisconsin 511 Traveler Information Annual Usage Summary January 3, Wisconsin 511 Phone Usage ( )

Cycling Master Plan Community Engagement Session WELCOME

Transportation & Land Use. Workshop: March 6, 2013

City of White Rock. Strategic Transportation Plan. May 16, 2005

Transportation 2040 Update: Eudora Public Input As of June 1, 2017

WELCOME. City of Greater Sudbury. Transportation Demand Management Plan

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study

City of Novi Non-Motorized Master Plan 2011 Executive Summary

METRO Light Rail: Changing Transit Markets in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area

Executive Summary. TUCSON TRANSIT ON BOARD ORIGIN AND DESTINATION SURVEY Conducted October City of Tucson Department of Transportation

MORE CONNECTIONS. Redesigning routes for the future of transit in Milwaukee County.

Rider Satisfaction Survey Phoenix Riders 2004

2016 APS Go! Surveys Summary Results for Oakridge Elementary School

BETHEL ROAD AND SEDGWICK ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY

2012 Transit Study Randolph County

2016 APS Go! Surveys Summary Results for Arlington Traditional School

TRANSIT & NON-MOTORIZED PLAN DRAFT FINAL REPORT Butte County Association of Governments

Corridor Vision Workshop Summary James Madison Elementary February 22,2018

NACTO Designing Cities Conference Project Evaluation: Tools for Measuring Success and Building Support. October 29, 2015

Welcome. Wilmington Transit Moving Forward Workshop Presentation. October 16, 2013

Performance Measures Year End 2015

Transportation Authority of Marin Renew Existing ½-cent Transportation Sales Tax

WALKNBIKE DRAFT PLAN NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE

A Vision For the Future The Role of Public Transportation in Central Oregon

Data Analysis February to March Identified safety needs from reported collisions and existing travel patterns.

Market Factors and Demand Analysis. World Bank

GIVING GEORGIANS A CHOICE TO KEEP MOVING

Memorandum. Fund Allocation Fund Programming Policy/Legislation Plan/Study Capital Project Oversight/Delivery Budget/Finance Contract/Agreement Other:

For Information Only. Pedestrian Collisions (2011 to 2015) Resolution. Presented: Monday, Apr 18, Report Date Tuesday, Apr 05, 2016

5. Pedestrian System. Accomplishments Over the Past Five Years

Performance Measures Year End 2018

INTRODUCTION. Specifically, the objectives are to:

Tulsa Metropolitan Area LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Purpose + Need. Connect: Thrive: Develop: < Strengthen the spine of our regional transportation system

Key objectives of the survey were to gain a better understanding of:

I-35W Solutions Alliance Project Update July 13, 2017

Transportation Master Plan Advisory Task Force

Auckland Transport Monthly Indicators Report 2018/19

City of Wilsonville 5 th Street to Kinsman Road Extension Project

ROUTES 55 / 42 / 676 BUS RAPID TRANSIT LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Cobb Community Transit

VI. Market Factors and Deamnd Analysis

Seattle Transit Master Plan

US 1 Express Lanes Public Kick-Off Meeting

Traffic Safety Plan Traffic Safety Plan 2015

Satisfaction with Canada Line and Connecting Buses. Wave 2

ECONOMY PEOPLE ENVIRONMENT

Metropolitan Council Transportation Committee

Transcription:

Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council Regional Transit Master Plan (RTMP) Technical Advisory Committee Kick-Off Meeting May 16, 2012

Meeting Agenda Project Orientation Presentation of Survey Results Bend onboard survey Community connector onboard survey Community preferences telephone survey Funding and Governance Options Other Items Next TAC meeting Stakeholder process 2

PROJECT ORIENTATION

RTMP Study Goals Identify how transit can support regional transportation and sustainability goals Establish a vision for transit in Central Oregon Identify priority service structure in Central Oregon Identify what is required to implement such services Identify and secure a local source of funding for transit Planning efforts for the entire CET system are coordinated 4

RTMP Study Timeline Deliverable Month 2012 2013 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Project Management; Agency and Public Involvement * PT PT PT PO TAC SAC PT TAC SAC PO Existing Conditions and Planning Baseline * D F Community Preferences and On- Board Surveys S D F Future Transit Demand D F Recommended Bus Routes and Service D F Regional Transit Funding Sustainability Plan * B B B B B D B Plan Implementation Measures * B B B COIC Board PO Public Outreach D Draft Document TAC Technical Advisory Committee S Surveys F Final Document PT Project Team Stakeholder Advisory SAC Committee 5

Coordination with Other Planning Efforts Bend Public Transit Plan On a separate timeline Coordinated survey efforts Coordinated consultant activities COTOP Separate but related timeline More details in the second meeting Launch Project Website / Project Updates Launch Web Outreach Survey Existing Conditions Memo Public Transit Plan (PTP) Goals Future Opportunities Memo Future Services Concepts and Projects Memo Public Transit Plan Prior Technical Reports Review Trip Forecasts and Infrastructure Review Alternative Scenario Development and Cost Analysis Public Policy Analysis Final Plan Deliverable Month Project Management; Agency and Public Involvement * Existing Conditions and Planning Baseline * 2012 2013 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 PU PU PU PU PU PU DF D F TAC MOBILE PUBLIC OUTREACH PB D F TAC PB D F D F TAC PB CC D F PO TAC PB CC D F D F TAC PB SAC D F D F TAC PB SAC Community Forums PB D F TAC PB SAC Community Forums SAC SAC PT PT PT PT PO TAC TAC PO D F 6

Bend MPO Public Transit Plan Flexible, long-range transit service plan Assessment of land use and public facility constraints (water, sewer, stormwater) along existing and potential future transit corridors Along what arterial streets could City intensify land use to support higher quality transit service? Project Timeline: 7

SURVEY RESULTS

Overview of Survey Efforts Cascades East Transit On-Board Passenger Surveys Bend Completed between 3/12 and 3/17 323 surveys received on Bend local fixed-routes Element of the Regional Transit Master Plan Community Connector Completed between 4/25 and 5/4 147 surveys received on Community Connector routes Dial-a-ride To be surveyed in late May or summer Community Preferences Survey Completed in Deschutes, Jefferson and Crook Counties General public telephone survey 800 surveys completed 9

Bend Onboard Survey: Survey Goals Survey goals are to identify: Trip origin/destination Trip purpose Length and frequency of transit use Level of transit dependency Attitudes about various service elements Suggested improvements Existing passenger demographics General comments 10

Bend Onboard Survey: Existing Routes 11

Bend Onboard Survey: Trip Purpose High percentage of combined school- and workrelated trips Many school-related trips are to COCC, likely related to the economy Other 15% Recreation/Social 5% Medical/Dental 6% School 26% Personal Business/Errands 10% n=292 Shopping 14% Work 24% 12

Bend Onboard Survey: Transfer Activity High transfer rate on all Bend local routes Characteristic of hub and spoke system Only 30% to 50% of passengers did not need to transfer Single transfer from regional routes to any Bend route Between Local Routes Between Local and Regional Routes Route 1 Route 2 Didn't Transfer Transferred Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 3 Route 4 Route 4 Route 5 Route 5 Route 6 Route 6 Route 11 Route 11 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 # Responses n=18 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 # Responses 13

Bend Onboard Survey: Major O-D Pairs COCC is major trip destination Downtown also a major endpoint, which requires a transfer from some routes (1, 4, 5, 6) 14

Bend Onboard Survey: System Access Pedestrian access is critical; bike access also important Walk Bike Get Ride 10% 4% 90% Drive 2% Other 1% Bus stop access times by mode: Walk Access Times N=320 Bike Access Distances 0 100 200 300 400 Number of Responses Drive Access Distances 11-15 min 8% 16-30 min 3% 6-10 min 31% 31-50 min 2% 1-5 min 56% 4-10 mi 10% 1-3 mi 55% < 1 mile 35% 4-11 mi 43% < 1 mile 14% 1-3 mi 43% N=254 N=20 N=7 15

Bend Onboard Survey: Frequency and Longevity High % of regular riders About 30% of riders have been using CET less than a year First time 2% 2 to 4 days per week 37% N=314 1-4 days per month 5% Less than 1 day per month 2% 5 or more days per week 56% Less than 1 year 28% More than 4 years 27% How often do you ride? N=312 1 to 4 years 43% How long have you been riding CET? 16

Bend Onboard Survey: Transit Dependence Over a quarter would have walked Nearly a quarter would not have made the trip Driven car 7% Taxi 5% Other 4% Biked 10% Walked 26% Carpooled/dropped off 12% N=304 Combination 13% Would not have made this trip 23% 17

Bend Onboard Survey: Rider Improvement Priorities Later evening service 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM Top priority for 40% Sunday service Top priority for 27% 5% Run until what time? 8% 23% 28% 33% Later evening weekday service (N=213) Sunday service (N=189) More frequent Saturday service (N=137) More frequent weekday service (N=123) Longer Saturday hours (N=121) Other (N=42) Earlier morning weekday service (N=39) Service to other destination(s) (N=31) More direct service (N=29) Top three improvements Most important improvement (N=189) 68% 40% 61% 27% 44% 5% 40% 8% 39% 4% 14% 9% 13% 2% 10% 4% 9% 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 15 Midnight Other n=173 2% 2% 0 20 40 60 Number of Responses 18

Community Connector Onboard Survey: Survey Goals Similar to Bend onboard survey, but less focused on trip level data Trip origin and destination Trip purpose Transfers Transit dependency Perceptions about various service elements Potential improvements Length and frequency of transit use Level of transit dependency Existing passenger demographics General comments 19

Community Connector Onboard Survey: Existing Network 20

Community Connector Onboard: Trip Purpose Over 75% of trips are school or work-related Medical/Dental Appointment 5% Recreation or Social Visit 5% Shopping, Errands, or Personal Business 11% Other or Combined Purposes 2% College or School 45% n=139 Work or Work- Related 32% 21

Bend Local Fixed-Routes Community Connector Onboard : Transfer Activity Transfers to/from Community Connector and Bend routes Other Community Connector routes Local Dial-A-Ride Bend Local Fixed Route Community Connector Local Public Bus (Demand Response) Bend Dial-A-Ride 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 # Responses In Bend, highest transfer rate is to COCC 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 # Responses 22

Community Connector Onboard : System Access How are people accessing the bus stop? Over 80% walk 15 minutes or less A third drive 1-2 miles, 55% drive 10 miles or more Nearly 90% bike 3 miles or less Walk Get Ride Drive & Park Local Public Bus or DAR Bike 7% 20% 19% 26% 37% 11-15 minutes 23% 16-30 minutes 13% N=53 Walk Access Times 31-50 minutes 6% 6-10 minutes 28% 1-5 minutes 30% Drive Access Distances N=175 Other 3% 0 20 40 60 80 Number of Responses 16-20 miles 21% 1-2 miles 34% Note: Could choose one or more N=33 10-15 miles 33% 3-4 miles 9% 5-9 miles 23 3%

Community Connector Onboard : Frequency and Longevity High % of regular riders (84% more than 2 times/week) Very high % of new riders! More than 4 years 4% First time 4% N=140 1-4 days per month 11% 2 to 4 days per week 40% Less than 1 day per month 5% 5 or more days per week 44% 1 to 4 years 26% How often do you ride? N=145 Less than 1 year 66% How long have you been riding CET? 24

Community Connector Onboard : Transit Dependence Over 30% would have driven themselves Fairly high level of riders without other transportation options Walked 3% Other 5% Multiple 3% Biked 1% Taxi 1% Would not have made this trip 32% Gotten ride or carpooled 25% N=145 Driven car 30% 25

Community Connector Onboard : Rider Satisfaction Nearly 90% satisfied with overall service High satisfaction with driver courtesy, lower satisfaction with dispatch courtesy Lowest satisfaction with condition of bus stops and bike capacity on buses Excellent Good Fair Poor No Opinion Driver courtesy (n=146) Cleanliness of vehicles (n=146) Overall bus service (n=145) Bus arrives on time (n=147) Availability of seats on bus (n=146) Ease of transfers (n=143) System easy to understand (n=144) Bus maps/schedules (n=146) Dispatch courtesy (n=143) Condition of bus stops (n=144) Capacity for bikes on bus (n=144) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 26

Community Connector Onboard : Rider Improvement Priorities Highest priority: Weekend service Saturday Sunday More frequent AM/PM service Midday service Write-in suggestions: Restrooms/shelters (e.g., Redmond, Prineville) 2:37 Redmond- Madras Stops at Juniper Ridge Weekend Service (N=82) Saturday Service (N=77) More frequent morning or afternoon service (N=56) Sunday service (N=54) Midday service (N=48) Later evening weekday service (N=34) Other - restrooms and/or shelters (N=29) Earlier morning weekday service (N=17) None - service meets my needs (N=14) New stop along existing route (N=13) New Park & Ride Location (N=11) New CET Service (N=10) See Weekend Result See Weekend Result 18% 24% 8% 20% 15% 12% 5% 10% 1% 9% 3% 8% 2% 7% 2% Top three improvements Most important improvement (N=101) 14% 31% 34% 39% 38% 54% 58% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 27

Community Connector Onboard: What to maintain? If CET is forced to cut service, what is most important to maintain (choose up to two): Early morning and late afternoon/evening service (82%) Late Afternoon / Evening 38% Early Morning 44% N=242 Early Afternoon 14% Late Morning 4% 28

Community Preferences Survey: Survey Goals Goals are to identify: Knowledge of transit and CET Current travel patterns, frequency of transit use Perceptions of transit Geographic support for transit How transit is valued Community expectations for transit Willingness to financially support transit 29

Community Preference Survey: Sampling Plan Area Population Bend 38% Redmond 13% Areas outside Bend/Redmond 50% 30

Community Preference Survey: Sampling Plan Crook Co. - 52 Jefferson Co. - 50 Deschutes Co. - 698 31

Community Preferences Survey: Who responded? Employment status Bend Outside of Bend/Redmond Redmond 32

Community Preferences Survey: Who responded? High % of drive alone (home to work), high vehicle availability Typically Travel (all respondents) Vehicle Availability 33

Community Preferences Survey: Community Services Bend Redmond Outside of Bend/ Redmond 34

Community Preferences Survey: Transit Services Relatively high unfamiliarity with transit services; more familiar in Bend Bend Redmond Outside of Bend/Redmond 35

Community Preferences Survey: Transit Services High % have heard of Cascades East Transit (or Bend Area Transit), somewhat lower outside of Bend Bend Redmond Outside of Bend/Redmond 36

Community Preferences Survey: Views on Public Transit Bend Redmond Outside of Bend/ Redmond 37

Community Preferences Survey: Transit Services Rating of transit service? Benefits transit provides to the community? 38

Community Preferences Survey: Transit Services Have you ever used CET? 39

Community Preferences Survey: Transit Services Rating of potential public transit improvements Bend Better service during peak periods Prefers regular bus service (over call for reservation) Better commuter service to Bend Redmond Better commuter service to Bend Better service during peak periods More frequent service Outside of Bend/Redmond Better service during peak periods Better commuter service to Bend Prefers regular bus service (over call for reservation) 40

Community Preferences Survey: Voter Preferences Did you vote in the latest elections? 41

Community Preferences Survey: Voter Preferences Support tax increase of $25 / $100K for 10 years to support transit? 42

Community Preferences Survey: Voter Preferences If this increase were permanent? 43

Community Preferences Survey: Voter Preferences Support tax increase of $40/$100K for significant improvements? 44

Community Preferences Survey: Key Findings Compared to other public services, transit had the lowest performance Relatively low familiarity with transit services, but high name recognition (somewhat higher in Bend) Twice as many very strongly agree that public transit is needed for those without other transportation options (compared to other benefits) Only about 15% disagree that public transit provides some benefits Other factors also rated highly 43-48% of residents support a $25/$100K property tax for transit Somewhat stronger support of it in Redmond Redmond residents more positively view public transit 45

OTHER ITEMS & NEXT STEPS

Next Steps Funding and governance (handout) Public outreach schedule Next TAC meeting 47