Transportation Overview 1 HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT 2 History Since - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

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
• f 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

9

‐ 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

All Rural Services – Ride Data

Historic Ridership Data

10

‐ 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000

Bend Ride Data

Fixed Route Paratransit

Historic Ridership Data

11

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000

Seasonal Service Ride Data

• Mt. Bachelor

Ride the River

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

• About a third are relatively new

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
• 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

Length of Use Mode of Access

Local Public Bus On‐Board Survey: Usage Patterns

16

Local Public Bus On‐Board Survey: Improvement Priorities

• Weekend service

– Saturday > Sunday

• Same day rides
• Later evening service
• Fixed‐route, no

reservations

All Riders

17

Local Public Bus On‐Board Survey: Key Findings

• Strong potential for local

fixed route in Redmond

– 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

Would you use fixed route?

18

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)

• 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

• 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

Key Findings: Region‐wide

• 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 Vision

• 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

DRAFT Goals and Objectives

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

23

Sisters

La Pine

Madras area Prineville

24,000 800 1,000 1,600 1,200 800 3,000 2,800

Redmond

Bend

One‐Way Daily Vehicle Trips (both directions)

Transit Demand Estimates: Future Market Potential

24

Bend Redmond

Sisters

Prineville

La Pine

Madras

Culver/Metolius

High Medium Low Future Market Potential

Between Communities Within Communities

Warm Springs

TRANSIT PERFORMANCE AND FUNDING

25

Performance Data

26

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

Financial Data‐Bend

27 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

Financial Data‐Rural

28

REVENUE '08‐09 '09‐10 '10‐11 '11‐12

• Est. '12‐13

PURCHASED SERVICE $0 $141,088 $317,718 $255,220 $276,245 ODOT STF FUNDS $146,318 $147,984 $332,173 $289,418 $250,522 ODOT ‐ OTHER $267,900 $334,577 $654,068 $892,564 $942,791 ODOE ‐ BETC $245,871 $0 $0 $0 $175,591 DESCHUTES COUNTY $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 CROOK COUNTY $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 CITY OF MADRAS $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 CITY OF PRINEVILLE $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 CITY OF REDMOND $19,900 $19,900 $19,900 $19,900 $19,900 CITY OF METOLIUS $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 CITY OF CULVER $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 CITY OF SISTERS $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 CITY OF LAPINE $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 DHS ‐ MEDICAID $59,050 $78,002 $159,802 $102,989 $75,615 OTHER CONTRACT INCOME $191,911 $357,016 $167,491 $498,110 $125,974 FARES $71,070 $118,115 $214,087 $251,055 $219,443 TOTAL REVENUE $1,028,520 $1,223,181 $1,891,739 $2,335,756 $2,117,581 EXPENSES ADMIN EXPENSES $101,015 $105,928 $151,350 $286,495 $339,200 PROGRAM SUPERVISION PERSONAL SERVICES $40,663 $57,143 $159,522 $95,441 $166,787 PROGRAM PERSONAL SERVICES $495,937 $657,388 $969,901 $1,174,456 $1,002,445 PROGRAM CONTRACTED SERVICES $69,656 $121 $0 $2,500 $7,559 TOTAL PROGRAM PERSONAL EXPENSES $606,256 $714,652 $1,129,422 $1,272,397 $1,176,791 FUEL $131,556 $201,316 $346,562 $400,185 $296,247 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE/REPAIRS $113,365 $128,294 $178,715 $224,164 $160,993 INSURANCE $8,864 $13,360 $14,332 $24,558 $21,950 BUILDING COSTS $11,890 $13,804 $13,107 $23,373 $19,419 LEGAL $20 $109 $366 $0 $21,950 OTHER MATER. & SERVICES $55,553 $45,718 $57,886 $104,585 $81,030 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $1,028,520 $1,223,181 $1,891,739 $2,335,756 $2,117,581

Financial Data‐Mountain

29

REVENUE '11‐12

• Est. '12‐13

CONTRACT INCOME $172,098 $197,019 FARES $4,031 $5,500 TOTAL REVENUE $176,129 $202,519 EXPENSES ADMIN PERSONAL SERVICES $24,357 $26,792 GENERAL ADMIN MAT. & SERVICES $3,954 $4,349 TOTAL ADMIN EXPENSES $28,310 $31,141 PROGRAM SUPERVISION PERSONAL SERVICES $21,899 $24,089 PROGRAM PERSONAL SERVICES $70,989 $78,088 TOTAL PROGRAM PERSONAL EXPENSES $92,889 $102,177 FUEL $31,042 $32,000 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE/REPAIRS $9,609 $18,000 INSURANCE $4,485 $8,970 BUILDING COSTS $0 $0 LEGAL $0 $0 OTHER MATER. & SERVICES $9,794 $10,230 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $176,129 $202,519

Financial Data‐Brokerage

30

REVENUE '08‐09 '09‐10 '10‐11 '11‐12

• Est. '12‐13

ODOT ‐ OTHER $0 $38,206 $47,348 $61,227 $0 DHS ‐ MEDICAID $2,237,728 $2,292,549 $2,702,832 $2,624,777 $2,402,055 TOTAL REVENUE $2,237,728 $2,330,755 $2,750,180 $2,686,004 $2,402,055 EXPENSES ADMIN PERSONAL SERVICES $85,410 $80,902 $106,303 $83,698 $128,735 GENERAL ADMIN MAT. & SERVICES $3,724 $6,841 $12,865 $14,566 $25,640 TOTAL ADMIN EXPENSES $89,134 $87,743 $119,168 $98,264 $154,374 PROGRAM SUPERVISION PERSONAL SERVICES $116,492 $252,891 $258,255 $227,442 $189,721 PROGRAM PERSONAL SERVICES $299,311 $260,803 $356,077 $297,641 $228,623 PROGRAM CONTRACTED SERVICES $1,671,348 $1,641,836 $1,938,541 $1,993,840 $1,744,788 TOTAL PROGRAM PERSONAL EXPENSES $2,087,150 $2,155,530 $2,552,874 $2,518,923 $2,163,132 INSURANCE $1,875 $2,130 $1,867 $2,035 $1,450 BUILDING COSTS $28,079 $31,387 $33,309 $29,748 $22,020 LEGAL $65 $567 $177 $71 $0 OTHER MATER. & SERVICES $31,423 $53,398 $42,785 $36,963 $61,079 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $2,237,728 $2,330,755 $2,750,180 $2,686,004 $2,402,055

Financial Data‐Combined

31

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 $141,088 $317,718 $513,114 $296,485 ODOT STF FUNDS $288,848 $211,549 $614,062 $404,366 $373,208 ODOT ‐ OTHER $560,986 $387,783 $909,504 $1,095,714 $1,122,334 ODOE ‐ BETC $245,871 $0 $0 $0 $175,591 DESCHUTES COUNTY $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 JEFFERSON COUNTY $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CROOK COUNTY $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 CITY OF MADRAS $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 CITY OF PRINEVILLE $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 CITY OF REDMOND $19,900 $19,900 $19,900 $19,900 $19,900 CITY OF BEND $1,074,732 $1,432,913 $989,325 $1,007,500 $1,027,650 CITY OF METOLIUS $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 CITY OF CULVER $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 CITY OF SISTERS $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 CITY OF LAPINE $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 DHS ‐ MEDICAID $2,296,778 $2,370,551 $2,862,634 $2,727,765 $2,477,671 OTHER CONTRACT INCOME $386,655 $383,909 $193,083 $729,604 $369,197 FARES $270,653 $330,324 $494,009 $526,244 $521,436 TOTAL REVENUE $5,749,503 $6,025,094 $7,130,826 $7,689,094 $7,120,885 EXPENSES ADMIN EXPENSES $421,903 $565,097 $439,587 $473,375 $612,079 PROGRAM PERSONAL EXPENSES $4,247,824 $4,437,679 $5,467,732 $5,723,938 $5,102,203 FUEL $332,589 $384,204 $551,562 $692,442 $616,346 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE/REPAIRS $393,495 $349,638 $400,059 $428,926 $392,583 INSURANCE $34,798 $15,490 $17,909 $31,461 $35,352 BUILDING COSTS $39,969 $109,113 $98,834 $108,671 $128,087 LEGAL $29,940 $675 $3,476 $16,809 $24,366 OTHER MATER. & SERVICES $248,984 $163,198 $151,668 $213,473 $209,871 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $5,749,503 $6,025,094 $7,130,826 $7,689,094 $7,120,886

Service Development and Funding

• CET was able to cobble together service across

the region using start‐up funds.

– Unlike other areas, where local funds sustain transit and are augmented by grants. – Enabled CET to experiment with services, figure out what would work.

• Now time to transition to sustainable funding

package

– Start‐up funds must be replaced by local funds. – State/federal grant sources being fully‐utilized (no add’l funding from those sources)

32

“Augmenting” funding

• Some funding options augment transit,

but don’t sustain it:

– Bus advertising – Group pass programs (can be used as match) – Raise Fares

• Can reduce ridership
• Can’t be used as match
• Can only raise so high then aren’t providing transit but

rather taxi system.

– Taxis don’t meet the needs met by transit systems.

33

Funding Options

(Local funding options used in OR)

Funding Option Description Advantages to Transit Who pays? Who decides? Comments Maintain Reliance

• n General Fund

Continue relying

• n City funding

Taxpayers City, County Property Tax Measure (Hood River, Tillamook, Klamath Falls) Levy new property tax Grows as community grows Property owners Voters within selected geography Requires dev. of transit district; elected Directors. Payroll Tax Measure (Eugene, Salem) Levy new payroll tax Grows as employment grows Employers Voters within selected geography Requires dev. Of transit district; elected Directors. City Transit Utility Fee (Corvallis) A levy to all utility accounts Easy to apply, distributes burden widely Owners and renters City Council action Local Sales Tax (Ashland) Locals & non‐ locals share cost Anyone buying goods/ services Voters Other??

34

Department Goals

• Continue to adapt service levels to resources

available and meet community needs.

• Develop agreement with CCO for NEMT.
• Develop funding that supports stability.
• Further develop procedures, policies, systems

to provide for safe operations, compliance with laws, and customer satisfaction.

• Create volunteer program.

35

Contacts

MORE INFORMATION? www.cascadeseasttransit.com Karen Friend, Transportation Manager kfriend@coic.org

36