Transportation Overview 1
HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT 2
History • Since the late 1990’s, COIC had led or staffed a variety of public transportation planning processes in Central Oregon. – Need for enhanced local public service. – Need for regional leadership in delivering services. – Need for inter ‐ community services. 3
Development • COIC established the regional Medical Ride Brokerage and Call Center in 2004 • Crook County requested COIC take over operation of the DAR service in Prineville in 2006. • Central Oregon Council on Aging (COCOA) entered into a MOU with COIC to assume the provision of DAR services in LaPine, Redmond, Sisters, and Madras in 2007. 4
Development • Cascades East Transit (CET) opened as a regional transit system in January, 2008. • In 2010, City of Bend approached COIC about merging Bend Area Transit (BAT) into the regional system. BAT became part of CET in September, 2010. • COIC entered into agreement with Mt. Bachelor to provide mountain service in 2011. 5
SERVICE INFORMATION 6
Current Transit Services CET offers 5 types of transit service. For the general public: • Local dial ‐ a ‐ ride in La Pine, Prineville, Sisters, Madras, and Redmond • Community Connector Shuttles connecting these communities and Bend • Special seasonal services – Mt. Bachelor Shuttle – Ride The River • 7 Local fixed routes in Bend Eligibility ‐ based: • Complementary paratransit in Bend 7
Current Transit Services 8
Historic Ridership Data All Rural Services – Ride Data 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 ‐ 9
Historic Ridership Data Bend Ride Data Fixed Route Paratransit 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 ‐ 10
Historic Ridership Data Mt. Bachelor Seasonal Service Ride Data Ride the River 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 11
REGIONAL TRANSIT MASTER PLAN PROCESS 12
Regional Transit Master Plan PLAN GOALS: • Identify how transit can support regional transportation and community development goals • Establish a vision and priority service structure for transit for each community and for the region as a whole. • Identify and secure local source(s) of funding for transit 13
Regional Transit Master Plan Survey Overview: • Cascades East Transit On ‐ Board Passenger Surveys – Bend – Community Connector – Local Public Bus • Community Preferences Survey – Completed in Deschutes, Jefferson and Crook Counties – General public telephone survey – 800 total surveys (400 Bend, 200 Redmond, 200 rest of three counties) 14
Local Public Bus On ‐ Board Survey: Usage Patterns • About a third are relatively new Length of Use riders (< 1 year) • Residents primarily use the service in their own community – As high as 81% of Redmond residents • Over a third use a disabled fare Mode of Access • Nearly a third would not have made the trip and nearly a third would have been driven by someone else – Similar to Community Connector – But only 7% would have driven themselves (vs. 30% for Community Connector) 15
Local Public Bus On ‐ Board Survey: Improvement Priorities All Riders • Weekend service – Saturday > Sunday • Same day rides • Later evening service • Fixed ‐ route, no reservations 16
Local Public Bus On ‐ Board Survey: Key Findings • Strong potential for local fixed route in Redmond Would you use fixed route? – 82% said “Yes” or “Maybe” when asked if they would use local fixed route (compared to 49% for all communities) – Strong desire for same ‐ day rides – Strong desire for service on weekends • Supported by demand estimates 17
Community Preferences Survey: Key Findings • 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) o Only about 15% disagree that public transit provides some benefits • 43 ‐ 48% of residents support a $25/$100K property tax for transit • Somewhat stronger support in Redmond 18
Key Findings: Region ‐ wide Value of a Regionally Integrated System • – One fare structure, brand, dispatch, connectivity, coordination, etc. (operational and customer benefits) – Dispersed activity and employment centers Role of Transit in Central Oregon • – Community values serving those without transportation options. – Improvements should benefit all riders, but also attract choice/new riders (e.g., ease/convenience/dependability, same ‐ day rides, fixed ‐ route in Redmond) – Transit also has other benefits related to economic development and the environment Appropriate Service Types • – Local service connected by Community Connectors is a good model – Limited stops on CC shuttles could expand choices (and still meet the needs of intercity passengers) – Fixed ‐ route in Redmond is feasible in the mid ‐ term (3 ‐ 10 years) – Prineville and Madras flex ‐ or fixed ‐ route in the mid ‐ to long ‐ term – Local demand response effectively serving other communities Transit Amenities and Access • – Vehicles are mostly in good or excellent condition, but amenities in some places are lacking (e.g., Redmond Library) 19
DRAFT Vision • Based on COIC’s vision for transportation programs and service principles for new or existing service: – Focus on highest demand – Prioritize services that have high community/ridership support – Maximize ride logistics and efficiency – Maintain the “regionality” of the system • Proposed Vision: – Provide safe, efficient, reliable and cost ‐ effective regional transit connections within and between the urban growth boundaries of all communities in Central Oregon. 20
DRAFT Goals and Objectives • Goal 1: Ensure transit service is safe, efficient and reliable • Goal 2: Provide effective and easy ‐ to ‐ use service for CET riders • Goal 3: Strive for financial sustainability that reflects community priorities and values • Goal 4: Increase the visibility and elevate the image of transit in Central Oregon • Goal 5: Provide appropriate service levels and types for CET ridership markets • Goal 6: Coordinate regional services with other local or intercity transit providers • Goal 7: Advocate for transit ‐ supportive development practices. 21
Service Plan Outline • Short ‐ Term (1 ‐ 3 Years): Service restructuring as required to stay within expected revenue until sustainable local funding base can be established • Mid ‐ Term (3 ‐ 10 Years): Preferred regional/local network developed based on existing local demand/priorities. • Long ‐ Term Concept (10+ Years): Enhancements to local services and CC shuttles. Provide an answer to the question “Where is this going?” 22
Total Travel Demand: 2030 Madras area 3,000 800 Prineville 2,800 Redmond 1,200 Sisters 800 24,000 1,600 Bend 1,000 One ‐ Way Daily La Pine Vehicle Trips (both directions) 23
Transit Demand Estimates: Future Market Potential Warm Springs Madras Culver/Metolius Redmond Prineville Sisters Bend Future Market Potential Between Within Communities Communities High Medium La Pine Low 24
TRANSIT PERFORMANCE AND FUNDING 25
Performance Data Fiscal Year 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 Bend Service Rides 354,021 377,033 434,204 479,021 486,525 Service Hours 37,827 29,472 35,777 36,187 36,071 Cost/Ride $7.01 $6.55 $5.73 $5.20 $4.93 Cost/Service Hour $65.65 $83.85 $69.57 $68.84 $66.50 Rural Service Rides 96,375 165,507 206,179 216,853 184,322 Service Hours 21,051 28,044 41,440 41,644 32,127 Cost/Ride $10.67 $7.39 $9.18 $10.77 $11.49 Cost/Service Hour $48.86 $43.62 $45.65 $56.09 $65.91 Ride Center Rides 58,072 62,607 71,850 81,368 80,868 Cost/Ride $38.53 $37.23 $38.28 $33.01 $29.70 Mountain Service Rides 47,559 52,315 Service Hours 2,970 3,267 Cost/Ride $3.70 $3.87 Cost/Service Hour $59.30 $61.99 26
Financial Data ‐ Bend REVENUE '08 ‐ 09 '09 ‐ 10 '10 ‐ 11 '11 ‐ 12 Est. '12 ‐ 13 FTA $578,581 $720,578 $704,091 $638,387 $705,913 PURCHASED SERVICE $0 $0 $0 $257,894 $20,241 ODOT STF FUNDS $142,530 $63,565 $281,889 $114,947 $122,687 ODOT ‐ OTHER $293,086 $15,000 $208,088 $141,923 $179,544 CITY OF BEND $1,074,732 $1,432,913 $989,325 $1,007,500 $1,027,650 OTHER CONTRACT INCOME $194,744 $26,893 $25,592 $59,396 $46,204 FARES $199,583 $212,209 $279,922 $271,158 $296,493 TOTAL REVENUE $2,483,256 $2,471,158 $2,488,907 $2,491,205 $2,398,731 EXPENSES ADMIN EXPENSES $231,754 $371,425 $169,069 $60,306 $87,363 PROGRAM SUPERVISION PERSONAL SERVICES $111,100 $110,887 $138,082 $110,800 $84,411 PROGRAM PERSONAL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $148,642 $236,923 PROGRAM CONTRACTED SERVICES $1,443,318 $1,456,609 $1,647,354 $1,580,287 $1,338,768 TOTAL PROGRAM PERSONAL EXPENSES $1,554,418 $1,567,496 $1,785,436 $1,839,729 $1,660,102 FUEL $201,033 $182,888 $205,000 $261,215 $288,098 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE/REPAIRS $280,130 $221,344 $221,344 $195,153 $213,590 INSURANCE $24,059 $0 $1,711 $382 $2,981 BUILDING COSTS $0 $63,923 $52,418 $55,550 $86,648 LEGAL $29,854 $0 $2,933 $16,738 $2,416 OTHER MATER. & SERVICES $162,008 $64,082 $50,997 $62,132 $57,532 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $2,483,256 $2,471,158 $2,488,907 $2,491,206 $2,398,731 27
Recommend
More recommend
