Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTrans 2010-11-01 Item 2A - Discusstion - King County Metro Transit Reductions and Policy Changes <1 *ILA ty J z �sz Ci ty of Tukwila a 2 Jim Haggerton, Mayor 190 INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM. Bob Giberson, Public Works Director 0 .40 Jack Pace, Community Development Director: 4' DATE October 27, 2010 SUBJECT: King County Metro Transit Transit Reductions and Policy Changes ISSUE The County has issued draft Transportation Policy changes and will be receiving transit reduction recommendations soon from the Regional Transit Task Force (RTTF) BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) establishes the policy framework for guiding growth and development in King County through the establishment of the Countywide Planning Policies (CPP) and for implementing the policies and actions of Vision 2040 This policy framework is intended to guide decisions by all cities in the county as they plan to accommodate and serve growth. The GMPC is also responsible for describing appropriate mechanisms which government can use to promote the desired development pattern through the CPP. At the last Growth GMPC meeting on March 17, 2010, members asked staff to address three questions regarding the allocation of regional service delivery. The three specific areas staff was requested to address were prioritizing investments in regional roads, financing transit improvements, and identifying the relationship of the work of the GMPC to that of the Regional Transit Task Force (RTTF). Staff has prepared responses to each of the questions and made a recommendation that the GMPC includes an action on revised draft policy language (see Motion No. 10 -1 10 -2) With these revised policies, King County Council is determining how they will make the budget reductions for transit. Metro revenues began to fall in 2008 and they realized that the shortfall was not temporary. The RTTF will consider policy framework guidance for necessary transit reductions and any potential future growth. The draft RTTF Final Report and Recommendations is available at the RTTF website htto. /www. kinacounty. aov /transoortation (rransitTaskForce /Documents. asox RECOMMENDATION Information only. Attachments. King County Staff Report Re Motion Nos. 10 -1 and 10 -2 Draft RTTF Final Report Executive Summary only 611 King County Metropolitan King County Council Physical Environment Committee STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 5 1 Name: Rick Bautista Proposed No:: 2010 -0376 Date: July 27, 2010 Invited: Paul Reitenbach, GMPC staff coordinator SUBJECT An Ordinance adopting Growth Management Planning Council "GMPC recommendations relating to (1) the interim Potential Annexation Area "PAA map and (2) policies guiding allocation of regional transit services. COUNCIL PRIORITIES This proposed ordinance are relevant both to the Council's Mobility for People, Goods and Services Priority and to its Local and Regional Government Priority. BACKGROUND Pursuant to CPP FW -1 step 9 the GMPC voted unanimously to recommend GMPC Motions 10 -1 and 10 -2. These GMPC motions recommend the following actions: GMPC Motion 10 1: amends the interim PAA map in the Countywide Planning Policies to expand the PAA for the City of Renton and proportionately reduce the PAA for the City of Kent; and GMPC Substitute Motion 10 2: amends Countywide Planning Policies "CPP FW -18, FW -19 and T -14 to describe the intended relationship between transit service and existing and planned densities. 1 FW -1 (Step 9) Amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies may be developed by the Growth Management Planning Council or its successor, or by the Metropolitan King County Council, as provided in this policy Amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies, not including amendments to the Urban Growth Area pursuant to Step 7 and 8 b and c above, shall be subject to ratification by at least 30 percent of the city and County governments representing 70 percent of the population of King County Adoption and ratification of this policy shall constitute an amendment to the May 27, 1992 interlocal agreement among King County, the City of Seattle, and the suburban cities and towns in King County for the Growth Management Planning Council of King County 1 Proposed Ordinance 2010 -0347 would ratify the proposed changes on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County, as required by CPP FW -1, Step 9. THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL The GMPC is a formal body comprised of elected officials from King County, Seattle, Bellevue, the Suburban Cities, and Special Districts. The GMPC was created in 1992 by interlocal agreement, in response to a provision in the Washington State Growth Management Act "GMA requiring cities and counties to work together to adopt CPPs. Under GMA, the CPPs serve as the framework for each individual jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, and ensure countywide consistency with respect to land use planning efforts. As provided for in the interlocal agreement, the GMPC developed and recommended the CPPs, which were adopted by the County Council and ratified by the cities. Subsequent amendments to the CPPs follow the same process: recommendation by the GMPC, adoption by the County Council, and ratification by the cities. Amendments to the CPPs become effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least 30% of the city and County governments representing at least 70% of the population of King County. A city shall be deemed to have ratified an amendment to the CPPs unless, within 90 days of adoption by King County, the city by legislative action disapproves it. SUMMARY OF GMPC MOTIONS 10 -1 AND 10 -2 GMPC MOTION 10 -1 (Kent and Renton PAAs) This motion amends the interim PAA map to reflect an agreement between the Cities of Kent and Renton for a boundary modification of their respective PAAs. This modification will reduce Kent's Panther Lake PAA and expand Renton's Fairwood PAA to include all of Soos Creek Park and Trail north of SE 208th Street in the Fairwood PAA. The subject area is comprised of the western portion of Soos Creek Park and Trail adjacent to the Fairwood PAA. During the Panther Lake Annexation, Kent and King County agreed that Kent would leave the park out of the annexation and annex up to the western boundary of the park. King County worked with the cities of Kent and Renton to reach this agreement to prevent the creation of an urban island upon the annexation of the Fairwood PAA to the City of Renton GMPC MOTION 10 -2 (REGION TRANSIT SERVICE POLICIES) This motion recommends three amendments to the CPPs (Policies FW -18, FW -19 and T -14) with regards to transit service. 2 of 4 These amendments were instigated by the adoption of GMPC Motion 09 -1 in October 2009, wherein the interjurisdictional "IJT staff team were directed to develop options for "new CPP policy language that will prioritize regional service delivery in ways that promote the regional growth strategy." In response to that motion, the IJT staff work carried out a work program that included. 1. Identification of regional services that may be addressed by such policy review, 2. Review of existing regional and countywide policies (e.g. Vision 2040, existing CPPs, and functional plans for regional services that are related to the geographic distribution of growth, including parks and open space, wastewater and transit), and 3. Analysis of how well those policies have been implemented through functional plans of service providing agencies. Based on its analysis, IJT staff recommended (and the GMPC concurred) that the staff's further evaluation be focused on amending the CPPs to clarify and strengthen guidance for provision of transit service, specifically to ensure that transit allocations made by King County Metro are responsive to existing land uses and densities and locations targeted for future growth. The GMPC approved IJT staff- recommended amendments to FW -18 and FW -19 to reflect more dearly the appropriate service intended for different types of areas and to clarify the relationship among jurisdictions regarding transportation system planning and development. FW -18 The land use pattern shall be supported by a balanced transportation system, which provides for a variety of mobility options, This system shall be cooperatively .tanned, financed, and constructed. Mobility options shall include including 1) a high capacity transit system which that links the Urban Centers •cy vehicle 2) a system of bus and other transit modes that links Centers, provides circulation within the Centers, and links to the non center Urban Areas 3) a hiah- occupancv vehicle system that links Urban Centers: and 4) non motorized travel options. FW -19 e et: .e- TRO, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, The County and cities should work cooperatively with the Puaet Sound Reaional Council, and the State, and other relevant agencies to shall finance and develop a balanced transportation system that enhances regional mobility and reinforces mated financing strategics and land use plan which implement regional mobility and reinforce the Countywide vision for managing growth. The Vision 20202040 Regional Growth Strategies Strategy shall be recognized as the framework for creating a regional system of Centers linked by high- capacity transit and an interconnected system of freeway high- occupancy vehicle lanes, and supported by a transit system of bus and other transit options. 3 of 4 The GMPC also approved IJT staff recommendation to amend T -14 to provide more direct guidance for using transit service to advance the County's growth management goals. T -e manly -and citf d ss- anddesired growth management -ebje oc. These standards should consid- d- freq-ueney standards are neca.3cc-r/ -for differing seruice- editions including. a. Sf, erved by high capacity transit; Sedge-b- e crvcd by high capacity transit; and dice to areas outside Centers In support of countywide growth management obiectives, prioritize transit service throughout the county to areas where existing housing and employment densities support transit ridership and to Urban Centers and other areas planned for housing and employment densities that will support transit ridership. In allocating transit service, strive to meet the mobility needs of transit- dependent populations and provide at least a basic level of service to all urban areas of the county. COUNCIL STAFF ISSUES OR AMENDMENTS Staff notes a typo in the ordinance where there are two references to "Motion T2 One of the references should be to "Motion Ti This correction will be made in the substitute ordinance. ATTAC ENTS 1. Pro sed Ordinance 2010 -0376, with Attachments A and B 2. Trans "ttal Letter, dated June 28, 2010 4 of 4 16912 4/28/10 Sponsored By: Executive Committee /kw 1 MOTION NO. 10 -1 2 A MOTION to amend the interim Potential Annexation Area 3 map in the Countywide Planning Policies to expand the 4 Potential Annexation Area for the City of Renton. 5 6 'WHEREAS, Countywide Planning Policies LU -31 and LU -32 anticipate the collaborative 7 designation of Potential Annexation Areas (PAA) and the eventual annexation of these 8 areas by cities; 9 10 WHEREAS, the attached PAA map amendment removes an unincorporated urban area 11 currently assigned to the PAA for the City of Kent and adds this area to the City of 12 Renton's PAA; and 13 14 WHEREAS, the attached PAA map amendment is supported by both the cities of Renton 15 and Kent and by King County. 16 17 BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL OF 18 KING COUNTY HEREBY MOVES AS FOLLOWS: 19 20 1. Amend the Interim Potential Annexation Area (PAA) Map by shifting the 21 unincorporated urban area now within the PAA of the City of Kent shown on 22 attachment A of this motion, to the PAA of the City of Renton. 23 24 2. This amendment is recommended to the Metropolitan King County Council and the 25 Cities of King County for adoption and ratification. 26 27 ADOPTED by the Growth Management Planning Council of King County on April 28, 28 2010 in open session, and signed by the chair of the GMPC. 29 30 31 4 32 Dow Constantine, Chair, Growth Management Planning 33 Council 1 16912 4/28/10 Sponsored By Executive Committee /th/kw 2 3 4 5 SUBSTITUTE 6 MOTION No. 10 -2 7 8 9 A MOTION to approve amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies FW- 10 18, FW -19 and T -14 to describe the intended relationship between transit service 1 I and existing and planned densities, and updating and clarifying language in the 12 framework policies. 13 14 15 WHEREAS, in 2009 the Growth Management Planning Council approved new targets for 16 growth in housing units and employment for all jurisdictions within King County; and I7 18 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Planning Council recognized that the new growth 19 targets represented a significant increase in the expectations for some cities; and 20 21 WHEREAS, during discussions of the new growth targets, some cities expressed concern 22 about the relationship between growth and the delivery of regional services; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Planning Council directed staff to prepare new CPP 25 policy language that would prioritize regional service delivery in ways that promote the 26 regional growth strategy; and 27 28 WHEREAS, the interjurisdictional staff team presented its analysis of existing Countywide 29 Planning Policies related to service delivery along with a set of recommended changes at 30 meeting of the Growth Management Planning Council on March 17, 2010; 31 32 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT 33 PLANING COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY HEREBY MOVES TO AMEND CERTAIN 34 POLICIES IN THE COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES AS FOLLOWS: 35 36 37 FW -18 The land use pattern shall be supported by a balanced transportation system, which 38 provides for a variety of mobility options, e operativel ed 16912 39 financed, and constructed. A443b44•ty a tieas s alU include including 1) a high capacity 40 transit system wh -ic-k+ that links the Urban Centersi and is su::: 41 •ity transit system for 2) a system of bus 42 and other transit modes that links Centers. provides circulation within the Centers, 43 and links to the non center Urban Areas 31a high occupancy vehicle system that 44 links Urban Centers; and 41non- motorized travel options. 45 46 FW AI its olitar+ Rlar+ning 47 The County and cities should work c000erativelv with the Puget Sound 48 Regional Council, and the State, and other relevant agencies to shall finance and 49 develop a balanced transportation system that enhances regional mobility and 50 reinforces •d c+se plan which ►rn�ler►ent 51 the Countywide vision for managing growth. The 52 Vision 20202040 Regional Growth Strategics Strategy shall be recognized as the 53 framework for creating a regional system of Centers linked by high- capacity transit 54 and an interconnected system of freeway high occupancy vehicle lanes, and 55 supported by a tranr,it system of bus and other transit options. 56 57 T -14 e 't -level of scrvicc 58 59 cs. 60 61 62 a. 63 lr. 64 `c rvicc to a -s In support of countywide growth 65 management objectives, prioritize transit service throughout the county 66 to areas where existing housing and employment densities support 67 transit ridership and to Urban Centers and other areas planned for 68 housing and employment densities that will support transit ridership. In 69 allocating transit service. strive to meet the mobility needs of transit 70 dependent populations and provide at least a basic level of service to all 71 urban areas of the county. 72 73 74 75 Adopted by the Growth Management Planning Council of King County on April 28, 2010 76 in open session, and signed by the chair of the GMPC. 77 78 79 80 Dow Constantine, Chair, Growth Management Planning Council 81 Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations October 2010 DRAFT #42, 10/415/10 King County Metro Transit Department of Transportation [logo] For information, contact: Victor Obeso, Manager, Service Development Metro Transit Division Department of Transportation KSC -TR -0422 201 S. Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104 -3856 (206) 263 -3109 http://www.kinacountv.pov/transoortation/TransitTaskForce.aspx Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010 —DRAFT #24 ii Regional Transit Task Force Members :._.x__.=„_-.. a.....: „ri.. a z...- �r :.=::y..- ..r�t5,7 I1t: "<:i.:p':. yt: Sc v �._a.. ..Fa'+.. n `•r z+ K...... Chuck Ayers Cascade Bicycle Club .,r...... -nT cr y.. t._.., s _r. _..i_ asp-^ a..xu.. n.�::..a�,:zY:�;�:.,,.tt,.�� .,...,��t;s.:.ti:�.;a� Regional Interests Environmental Shiv Batra Riders- East Gene Baxstrom' Joint Transportation Committee Ex Officio Fred Butler Councilmember Issaquah Elected Officials East i Suzette Cooke Mayor Kent Elected Officials South Grant Degginger Councilmember Bellevue Elected Officials East Kevin Desmond` King County Metro Transit Ex Officio Bob Drewel PSRC Regional Interests PSRC Chris Eggen Councilmember Shoreline Elected Officials West David Freiboth Labor Council Organized Labor Noel Gerken Mayor Maple Valley Elected Officials South Christine Hoffmann Redmond Chamber Economic Development East Carl Jackson Amalgamated Transit Union Organized Labor Rob Johnson Transportation Choices Regional Interests Environmental Kate Joncas Downtown Seattle Assoc Economic Development West Josh Kavanagh University of Washington Education West Jane Kuechle AtWork! Regional Interests Accessible Services Steve Marshall Cascadia Center Transportation Expert Ed Miller Transit Advisory Committee Lynn Moody Hopelink Social Services East Estela Ortega El Centro De La Raza Social Services West Tom Pierson Federal Way Chamber Economic Development South Tom Rasmussen Councilmember Seattle Elected Officials West Carla Saulter Riders West Jared Smith Parsons Brinckerhoff Transportation Expert Jim Stanton Microsoft Trip Reduction East Bob Swarner Riders South Ron Tober' (starting in Sound Transit Ex Officio Sept. replaced by Greg Walker) Liz Warman Boeing Trip Reduction South Larry Yok Highline Community College Education South Ex- Officio Member Facilitator: John Howell, Cedar River Group, LLC Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010 —DRAFT #24 iii Contents Executive Summary 6 Section 1. Introduction 12 Section 2: Task Force Process 13 Section 3• Background Information 16 I. Overview of Metro Services and Budget 16 II. Challenges Facing Metro and Other Transit Agencies 21 111 Regional Growth Forecast 23 Section 4: Task Force Recommendations ....24 I. Introduction 24 11 Performance Measures 26 I11. Cost Control and Efficiency 30 IV. Overall Policy Guidance for Service Reduction and Service Growth 32 V. Implementation of Policy Direction: Use of Guidelines and Performance Measures 34 A. Service Guidelines 35 B Principles 36 Section 5: Legislative Agenda to Address Future Service Needs 38 Section 6: Mission and Vision 40 Section 7: Conclusion 41 Abbreviations 41 Glossary 42 References 47 Attachment 1: Enabling Legislation ...•48 Attachment 2: Task Force Ground Rules 48 Attachment 3: Draft Sources and Uses of Funds 48 Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010 —DRAFT #24 iv Attachment 4 Draft Performance Measures 48 Attachment 5 Status Report on Implementation of Audit Recommendations 48 Attachment 6 Conceptual Service Allocation Guidelines 49 List of Figures Figure 1. Ridership of Central Puget Sound Transit Agencies (2009) 19 Figure 2. King County Metro's Operating Revenue Sources 20 Figure 3 King County Metro's Operating Expenses 20 Figure 4. Metro's Projected Sales Tax Revenue Shortfall 22 Figure 6. Service Families and Productivity Measures 28 Figure 5. Overall Approach .34 Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010 —DRAFT #21 v Executive Summary Tc coma. Dsvc!cpcd p-cr`-, of scss-.,:d t aft] BACKGROUND A severe recession that struck the Puget Sound reaicn and the nation in late 2008 changed the road ahead for Kina County Metro Transit. The precipitous decline in economic activity led to a dramatic fall in sales tax receipts. Since 62 percent of Metro's ooeratina revenue comes from sales taxes. the droo in receiots has had a big impact. At the same time. Metro's ridership has arown sianificantly. and public expectations remain hiah Also in 2008, the Puaet Sound Regional Council (FSRC) developed the Vision 2040 and Transportation 2040 clans for lona- term growth and mobility of the region. These glans project a 42 percent increase in Kina County's Population and a 57 percent increase in jobs from 2000 to 2040, with most of this growth occurring in the county's 12 largest cities. -The plans suggest that a sizeable expansion of transit services will be needed to support that growth. In developing the 2010/2011 biennium budaet. Metro and Kina County were able to avoid larae reductions in transit service by making difficult choices and trade -offs, along with some temporary, one -time fixes. However, based on the Countv's revenue forecast through 2015. dramatic transit Key Transit System service reductions will be needed beginning in 2012. Design Factors: Task Force Charge and Process: The King County 1 Land use Council formed the Regional Transit Task Force (RTTF) 2 Social equity and in February 2010 to consider a policy framework for the environmental justice potential future arowth and. if necessary. contraction of 3 Financial sustainability Kina County's transit system. The Council asked the Task Force to consider six transit system desian factors. 4 Geographic equity to which the Task Force added a seventh. environmental 5 Economic development sustainability (see box). 6 Productivity and efficiency The 28 Task Force members were selected to represent 7 Environmental a broad diversity of interests and perspectives. Three ex sustainability officio members represented Metro. Sound Transit and the Washinaton State Legislature. An Executive Committee (King County Executive and three County Council members) ensured that the Task Force carried out its approved work Plan. Metro's Transit Manaaer of Service Development served as the project manager. An lnterbranch Working Group supported the Executive Committee and Task Force's work. Cedar River Group was hired to facilitate the process. The Task Force created two subgroups of Task Force members to delve into performance measures and cost control /efficiencies. The Task Force met from March throuah October 2010. The Task Force used a consensus based decision making approach. defining consensus as "all members can support or live with the Task Force recommendations." The Task Force agreed that if consensus was not unanimous, the differences of opinion would be included with the final recommendations. Task Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010— DRAFT 4 6 Force meetincs were n the c T open to rh. cubic. The as;< Force set aside :The 'r each meetma or public comment and reviewed comments submitted on its ti✓'lec site. Metro and iRec ional Overview, In early r eetinas. the Task For,e'earned about tk;Jefro s wor budaet, the realona'transit system, and regional enciovment and ocoulaticn forecasts. r Metro Services. Kina County Metro Transit is the bicaest cublic transportation aaencv in Washinaton state and one of the 10 laraest bus systems in the nation. In 2009 Metro carried aooroximatehv 112 million riders (boardinas) on 220 fixed routes connectina multiple centers throughout the county. Dial -a -Ride (DART) ser dice operates on a route with some fixed time, Points. but deviates to nick uo or drop off oassenaers. Metro serves 130 park- and -ride facilities with more than 25 000 oarkina stalls. Use has been at 74 percent since 2002. Metro operates one RapidRide bus rapid transit (BRT) line. with five more olanned to start service between 2011 and 2013 with frequent. all -dav service in busy transit corridors. Metro operates a 1.3 -mile transit tunnel in downtown Seattle that is served by buses and Sound Transit's Link light rail. Metro also serves 13 transit centers and operates service out of seven transit bases. Metro has approximately 69 lane -miles of overhead two -way wire for electric trollevbuses. which serve almost one -fifth of Metro ridership. Metro's fleet is operated by nearly 2.700 full- and part -time drivers. Service for riders with disabilities or special needs includes: accessible service on fixed routes: contracted American with Disabilities Act (ADA) oaratransit van service (Access). vans operated by local nonprofits (Community Access Transportation CAT). and taxi scrip. Metro's vanpools serve 6.100 People on an averaae weekday in more than 1.000 vans. Metro supports the reaional Ridematch oroaram for vanpools and carpools. Metro's services to employers include commute trip reduction (CTR). pass sales, and a Custom Bus Program. r Partnershio Agreements. Metro has created aareements with local businesses and iurisdictions to help support increased levels of transit service. In return for various partner actions. such as payments to support operating costs. investments to enhance transit speed and reliability. or enhancements to passenaer facilities. Metro provides increased levels of service. Customer Satisfaction. Overall rider satisfaction has remained relatively strona in the oast decade. with 93 percent of riders "very" or "somewhat" satisfied (slightly lower in the south county planning area). y Intearated Regional Transit System. Seven other transit agencies serve riders in the central Puaet Sound reaion: Community Transit (Snohomish County). Pierce Transit. Sound Transit (Kina. Snohomish and Pierce county urban areas). Washinaton State Ferries. City of Seattle (monorail and South Lake Union Streetcar). Everett Transit. and Kitsap Transit. Metro works closely with these aaencies on planning, operations. fare coordination. ioint facility construction. and maior oroiect implementation. Metro operates some Sound Transit Reaional Express bus service. Link liaht rail, and Seattle's South Lake Union Streetcar. Metro's Sudaet, Metro's 2010/2011 biennial operating budget includes $968 million in revenues and S1.2 billion in expenses. Most of the operating revenue (62 percent) is from a local options sales and use tax. The sales tax rate. 0.9 percent. is the maximum currently Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010— DRAFT #24 7 available to local transit aaencies -Another 26 cercenr. Themes from Task Force of Ai]etro's revenue comes from fares. The largest Discussions ocerating expense cateacry (65 percent) is or the personnel who provide Metro's services and prcarams. Regional Perspective Nine percent of cceratina excenses are for Kira Strike a balance among County aovernment overhead charges and services the best interest of the region as a whole, the from other County departments. Metro's capital needs of Metro riders, and program for 2009 -15 totals 81.28 billion. of which 59 the interests and needs of percent is for fleet replacement. local communities Challenge Facing Metro. Metro took action in the Transparency Decision 2008/2009 mid biennial budaet process to cut the making must be clear, consistent, and based on capital program bv more than S65 million. freeze hir na. criteria and objectives that reduce 19 full -time and 7 limited -term positions, and are clear to the public, raise transit and paratransit fares. (Metro had reduced staff positions in 2007 by 27 full time and term- limited Efficiency Metro and King Positions. and approved the first of four fare increases County must achieve greater efficiencies in between 2008 -and 2011.) With the 2010/2011 biennial transit operations. plans budaet. Metro's plan included increasing fares, for new service, and in eliminating 70 staff positions. cuttina bus service bv administration of the 75.000 hours. deferrina bus service expansion, system. reducina operatina reserves for four years, using fleet Balanced Approach To replacement reserves, and implementing schedule avoid reductions in transit efficiencies estimated to save 125,000 hours. Between services and to meet 2009 and 2015. Metro oroiects a revenue shortfall of future demand will require $1.176 billion. Without other actions, this would mean a combination of expense cuttina 400.000 hours of existing service by 2013, and reductions, efficiencies another 200.000 hours by 2015. and securing new revenues. National. Regional and State Trends. Transit Performance Based Use aaencies across the nation face similar funding crises tools, decision processes, and have had to make touch choices. In our region, and reporting that allow all Intercity Transit (Olympia). Community Transit. Pierce interested parties to Transit and Sound Transit all are making program evaluate performance. adiustments or service cuts. Two (Intercity and Pierce) have souaht or will seek voter approval of sales tax increases. The Joint Transportation Committee of the legislature is studying the state's role in public transportation, with a final report due in mid December 2010. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 1: Metro should create and adopt a new set of performance measures by servicetvrje. and report at le annually On .the agency's'perfdrmahce oil these measure-.:The performance rtiea should iricoroorafere,00rtinp on the'key system desian factors,' and should inclu comparisons` with Metro's peer transit agencies. Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010 DRAFT 04 8 Performance measures will hero the ou^iic Metro manager. and Kira °punt'/ decisicn makers understand if the transit SyStem IS meetina ocer=tioral ard policy :.)ciectives- As an e'vak ation tool. performance measures will help Metro understand how 't micht improve transit s /stem performance. and establish a stronc r aticna,e for difficult ociicv choices. The Task Force subcrouo on Performance measures 'wNorked with Metro staff to develop an initial example of metrics for overall system performance and easy -to- understand reportina. The Task Force recommends that Metro continue deveiooinc performance measures usina this model. The Task Force suaaests that Metro develop performance measures for all of Metro s operations (e.a customer service. vehicle maintenance. etc.). The Task Force supports Metro s suaaestion to include recommendations for the performance measurement system in Metro s Comprehensive and Strategic Plans to be submitted to the County Council by February 2011. Recommendation 2: King Countv and Metro management must control all of the aaencv's ooeratina expenses to provide a cost structure that is sustainable over time. Cost control strategies should include continuer) implementation of the 2009 performance audit findings. exploration of alternative service delivery models: potential reduction of overhead and internal service charaes. The Task Force believes that Metro's financial model. with current revenue sources and Metro's expense structure, is not sustainable over the Iona -term. The Task Force recommends effort in three areas: Continue to follow up on the 2009 King County Performance Audit recommendations to further reduce costs, create efficiencies and implement savings strategies. Provide regular updates on proaress and the expected timetable for implementation. Explore opportunities for alternative service products and service delivery models (e.a.. carpools. vanpoois. DART. taxi scrip, CAT and ACCESS oaratransit), including contractina out for some underperforming fixed route services. Any contractina out should be consistent with broad labor harmony principles. King County should clearly explain how and why overhead and internal service charges are allocated to Metro and County departments, and continue to explore ways to reduce overall overhead and internal service charges. Reconiinendation 3: The balk v guidance for rnakina service reduction and service ar'ovvth. decisions should be based on the following priorities:" 91 .Erntihasize oroiluctivity due to'its linkage to-economic development. land use and financiai sustainability 2) Ensuresocial equity; 'and `3) Provide cie©aranhic value throughout the county. Task Force members concluded that one overarchina statement of policy direction- and one approach to implementation of that policy,- should guide all service allocation decisions. They recommend that the policy statements they have crafted and the recommended use of guidelines and Performance measures should provide the foundation for all future service Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010 —DRAFT #24 9 allocation decisions. nrc!uding ser, ice reductions. sef'•i' •CV growth the historic concept of service estor =_:cr. and he Recommended Policy angora s i maintenance of `transit services in r sccnse t^ t� demand Direction would Replace v hanaes in system deg ,and o C'Ute cer`crmance The Existing Policy Guidance for approach recresents a fundamental chance in the wav Service Growth and transit service allocation decisions are made by Kjnc Reduction County (see box). The current policy for transit The Task Force concluded that one of the transit design service growth and reduction factors, productivity and efficiency. has a strong is based on three King County correlation to several of the other factors —land use. subareas (east, west and south) and was established in economic development and financial sustainability. As a Metro's 2002 2007 Six Year result. the Task Force is recommending a new policy Transit Development Plan. For framework to make service allocation decisions. The service growth, every 200,000 intent is to optimize efficiency of transit services. meet the hours of new transit service is needs of those that are most dependent on transit. and to be allocated with 40 percent create a system that is perceived as a fair distribution of to the east subarea, 40 service throughout the county. percent to the south, and 20 percent to the west. This is .:Recommendation 4: Create clear and transparent called the 40/40/20 policy Any i uideliites to be.t sed for-makina service ailocatiorr systemwide service reductions decisions, based upon the recommended policy are to take place in proportion to each subarea's share of the :direC tiort.' total service investment. Task Force members concluded that a new approach to Based on the current hours of service in each subarea, 62 decision making is needed. Members felt strongly that percent of the reduction would stakeholders need to understand the basis for service have to come from the west allocation decisions. and how those decisions will be subarea, 21 percent from the evaluated and adiusted over time. It is essential to this south and 17 percent from the new policy direction to develop and adopt service east. This is commonly called guidelines, along with the performance measures the 60/20/20 policy. recommended above. Service auidelines establish the objective metrics for making service allocation decisions. Guidelines will help the public. Metro and Kina County decision makers determine the appropriate level and type of service for different corridors and destinations. and for employment and population densities throughout the county. The Task Force supports Metro's proposal to incorporate newly developed Guidelines into Metro's Comprehensive and Strategic Plans to be submitted to the County Council in February 2011. Recarnmendation 5: Use the following Principles to provide direction for the develooment of service Guidelines. The Task Force did not develop recommended auidelines. They did, however. create a set of principle statements that should be used to shape the creation of the auidelines. The following principles should apply to all guidelines. Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010 —DRAFT tt24 10 Transparency. plant and measurability Use of the system design factors Flexibility to address dynamic financial conditions lntearation with the regional transocrtation system Development of thresholds as the basis for lecislon- maKina cn network chances Metro staff created conceotual scenarios and example auidelines for service reduction usine the draft policy Guidance. The approach snvolved three steps. (1) elirninatina the least productive routes: (2) assessina the impact of steo 1 and adiustina based on social eauity. system connectivity. and aeoaraohic coverage: and (3) identifvina oi✓oortunities for efficiencies In a similar exercise for service growth. the Task Force identified two types of future arowth. (a) response to ridership demand (to address over crowded bus routes). and (b) support for regional arowth (to connect identified population. employment and activity centers) Recommendation 6: Kina County, Metro. and a broad coalition of community and business interests should ,pursue state Ieaislation to create one or more additional revenue sources that would provide a lona -term, more sustainable base ofrevenue sunbort for transit services. TO build support for that work, it is essential that Kina Countv ado:ot and implement the task force recommendations. including use of the service Guidelines and performance measures, and continue efforts to reduce Metro's operating costs. The Task Force concluded that Iona -term. sustainable revenues for transit service are needed. Given the dramatic fluctuations in Metro's primary source of revenue (sales tax). the size of likely service reductions over the next five years. transit's importance to economic recovery, and the need for transit to support the expected arowth in population and employment. The Task Force identified three characteristics for a successful Iona -term revenue strategy: diversity of revenue sources. sufficient size of revenue source to address long -term needs, and flexibility to include a statewide and/or a local revenue source. Kina County and Metro should create a coalition of partners to begin immediately to inform state legislative leaders about the breadth of the potential service reductions facina the Metro system. the Task Force recommendations, and the actions Metro and Kina County are taking to address the anticipated revenue shortfall. It may take several legislative sessions to secure support for a Iona -term. sustainable fundina initiative. Recommendation 7: Metro staff should use the Task Force recommendations and d iscu s s i ons. as the framework for revising Metro's current mission statement, and creating a' vision statement (as one does not now exist).. Both draft statements should be 'included in. the.draft Comprehensive and Strategic Plans scheduled to be' submitted to he County Council in. February M1. Conclusion. The Task Force has created consensus recommendations that reflect a new policy direction for allocation decisions for transit service reduction and future service growth. The Task Force also has recommended a method for decision makina that will result in areater clarity. transparency and perceived fairness in decisions allocatina Metro transit services. Regional Transit Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, October 2010 —DRAFT ##23. 11