TAC Meeting Presentation 8/31/15 Additional Analysis Requested by - PDF document

TAC Meeting Presentation 8/31/15

Additional Analysis Requested by TAC • Baseline 2040 Values Baseline 2040: – Proximity analysis – ST2 investments – Job Accessibility – Similar growth of bus hours as concepts – Ridership/Mode Split – Reduced headways • MICs added to RGC lists – Some route modifications • Auto travel times (mostly truncation) • Midday travel times • Light Rail integration

Capital Impacts • Prior results included major capital investments – Express Network – Frequent Network • Direct Access Ramps (6 • Speed and Reliability ramps on I-405, I-5, and SR Corridors on all Frequent 167) Networks (230+ miles) • 20,500 new Park-and-Ride • New Ship Canal Crossing for Lots Buses

Capital Impacts • Prior results included major capital investments – Express Network – Frequent Network • Direct Access Ramps (6 • Speed and Reliability ramps on I-405, I-5, and SR Corridors on all Frequent 167) Networks (230+ miles) • 20,500 new Park-and-Ride • New Ship Canal Crossing for Lots Buses

Capital Impacts • Assumptions – Direct Access Ramps – Speed and Reliability Corridors • Reduce route travel time by 4-6 minutes • Not specific about treatments • $80M per improvement (TSP, curb bulbs, tec.) – Park and Ride Lots • $1M per mile • Ship Canal Crossing has • Expand existing lots exclusive bus lanes; $100M • No additional transit operating • 15% speed improvement costs to serve routes • $25,000 per stall

Capital Impacts: Results Change in Daily Boardings Change in Annual Revenue Hours Scenario Total Percent Total Percent No Speed and Reliability Corridor Improvements (Frequent Network) -47,300 -4.9% -228,942 -5.1% No Direct Access Ramps (Express Network) -13,000 -1.4% -70,840 -1.5% No Park and Ride Expansion (Express Network) -42,000 -4.6% N/A

Summary of Public Survey & Outreach 8/31/15

Long Range Plan Online Survey Results Summary Demographics • 6,000+ responses from June 4 to Aug 9 • 50% from outside the city of Seattle (see slide 3) • Roughly representative of different income strata (see slide 4) • 77% white, 8% Asian, 4% multiple ethnicities, 3% Latino, 2% Black, 1% American Indian • 55% of respondents are women, 44% men Service Mix Survey Question: Based on what you know about Express, Local and Frequent transit service, what mix of these types of service would you choose if you were going to plan a transit network. What we learned: Interest in all different kinds of service Integration Survey Question: Which of these features is most important to you about how Metro connects with other modes of travel. 1. Reducing travel time was the most important (47%) 2. Making transfers to other modes of travel easy (25%) 3. Minimizing transfers (18%) 1 Aug 18, 2015 4. Reducing duplication of service (4%)

Capital Priorities Survey Question: Please read the descriptions below and then rank the types of facilities or services that would make transit work better for you. 1. Improvements on arterial streets that help buses travel more quickly and reliably 2. Facilities for riders at major stops 3. Additional Park-and-Ride spaces 4. Improvements to freeways 5. Improvements on neighborhood streets for pedestrians and bicycles 6. New roadways in very congested areas that are used exclusively by buses and trains 7. New technologies that provide better information about your transit trip • “Improvements to arterials “ was ranked highest by respondents who live in west and east King County and second highest for those south King County. • “Additional Park & Rides” was ranked highest by respondents in south King County, second highest by those in east King County and lowest by those in west King County. • “Improvement for bicycle and pedestrians” and “new technologies” were ranked lowest by south and east King County respondents. • “New roadways exclusive to buses and trains” was the second most highest ranked by respondents in west King County and most often ranked 2 nd or 3 rd by east and south King County respondents, respectively. 2 Aug 18, 2015

What city do you live in? Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Seattle 50.4% 2920 Kirkland 10.8% 627 Auburn 7.9% 456 Sammamish 3.1% 177 Redmond 3.1% 178 Bellevue 3.1% 182 Shoreline 2.8% 163 Issaquah 2.3% 131 Renton 2.0% 117 Kent 1.8% 107 Bothell 1.6% 93 Federal Way 1.5% 85 Kenmore 1.1% 62 Burien 1.1% 63 Woodinville 0.9% 54 Mercer Island 0.9% 52 Note: Cities with response rates of 1% or higher are listed 3

Survey respondents’ income compared to King County’s population Census (2013 Income Survey Respondents ACS) Under $15,000 3% 5% 15-25 3% 5% 25-35 4% 5% 35-50/55 12% 9% 50/55-75 15% 15% 75-100 19% 14% 100-140/150 21% 22% 140/150+ 23% 24% 4

What cities do you travel to most often using public transportation? (check all that apply) Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Seattle 91.5% 5238 Bellevue 23.1% 1320 SeaTac 20.0% 1142 Redmond 11.2% 643 Kirkland 8.6% 491 Tukwila 6.5% 373 6.0% 346 Renton Shoreline 6.0% 343 Kent 4.7% 268 Issaquah 4.5% 260 Federal Way 3.9% 223 Bothell 3.8% 215 Auburn 3.4% 197 Burien 3.3% 191 Woodinville 2.8% 162 Mercer Island 2.2% 128 Lake Forest Park 2.0% 114 Kenmore 1.9% 106 Sammamish 1.6% 93 Des Moines 1.5% 86 5 North Bend 1.1% 62

What types of public transportation do you use? (check all that apply) Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Metro Bus 88.2% 5322 Sound Transit Link light rail 42.0% 2536 Sound Transit bus 39.6% 2392 Washington State Ferry 29.8% 1799 I drive to a Park-and-Ride lot 16.6% 1001 Sounder train 11.8% 713 Seattle streetcar 10.4% 630 King County Water Taxi 9.1% 552 Community Transit bus 9.0% 543 I do not use public transportation 6.7% 407 Pierce Transit bus 3.2% 193 Metro VanPool/VanShare 1.3% 79 Metro Access transportation 0.8% 47 Hyde Shuttle (Senior Services) 0.6% 36 Metro Rideshare 0.4% 22 6

How would you like to be able to use public transportation? (check all that apply) Answer Options Response Percent Response Count To get to work 82.4% 4944 77.9% 4675 To get to entertainment or sporting events 60.8% 3647 To go to parks or cultural destinations 53.5% 3207 For shopping trips To get to medical services 43.4% 2602 To get to school 15.7% 940 10.5% 632 Other (please specify) answered question 5999 skipped question 117 “Airport “was the most common response in the “other” category. 7

When would you most like to be able to use public transportation? · 67% said weekends during the day · 50% said weekends at night · Only 46% said middle of the day. 8

Metro Long Range Plan June Open Houses Dot Exercise Results Open house attendees were asked to use dot stickers to tell us what mix of transit service types they think would work best. Seattle- June 16 Redmond- June 23 Seattle- June 25 Federal Way- June 25 (daytime) 22% 31% 29% 27% 46% 41% 55% 50% 23% 23% 23% 30% Number of Attendees (signed in) Comment forms received Existing Network Mix Seattle (Evening) – 78 Seattle (Evening) – 27 Redmond - 61 Redmond – 17 frequent Seattle (Daytime) – 83 33% Seattle (Daytime) - 28 express Federal Way -35 Federal Way - 8 53% local 14% Total= 257 Total= 80

Draft Overview of Roundtable Discussions with Transit Dependent Populations Metro Long Rang Plan August 25, 2015 Meeting #1 with Key Community Stakeholders Purpose: Coordinate a Roundtable of representatives from organizations that serve transit-dependent, disabled, and limited-English proficient people to ensure that their input is received on the Long Range Plan. Work with the participants to support direct outreach to the people they serve for input on Long Range Plan topics and empower advocates to collect and represent feedback of their community. Meeting Details Date: Thurs, Sept 10, noon-1:30pm Location: 1225 S Weller St #430, Seattle, WA 98144 Proposed Agenda: 1) Introduction of stakeholders 2) Introduction of project 3) Why is this important, needed 4) Facilitated discussion Question : How does your community use and rely on transit? Question : How can the system work better for your community? To Dos : a) Develop Engagement Toolkit so that Participants can conduct their own outreach b) Establish on going schedule of interactions in between meetings to make sure organizations feel supported in their efforts c) Ongoing updates of general feedback to participants so that they can see how their feedback fits into broader conversations Organizations contacted: Organization Eritrean Community Center ACRS Ethiopian Community of Greater Seattle African Diaspora of Washington Faith Action Network Alliance of People with Disabilities Filipino Chamber of Commerce APACE Filipino Community Services ARC King County Heritage House at the Market Cambodian Cultural Alliance Homesight Catholic Community Services Hopelink Centro de la Raza Horn of African Services Chinese Information and Services Center Islamic Jafari Association of Greater Seattle CIRCC Japanese American Citizen League East African Community Services Jobs for Washington Graduates Eritrean Association of Greater Seattle Khmerican