Laserfiche WebLink
MovingAhead Spring 2019 Outreach Summary 8 <br />Open-ended Responses <br />Participants were asked what more the project team needed to know as they refined the final package. <br />Answers covered a broad range of territory — including advocacy for both spending more and spending <br />less; pegging spending to various criteria including climate goals and ridership goals; trees, specific <br />transportation modes, roads and bus lines, and more — without a dominant trend. <br />In the final part of the survey, participants were asked what else they would like to tell the project team. <br />Many responses were statements for or against public transit or the Lane Transit District in general, or <br />EmX more specifically. Other submissions included an extensive, alternative view of climate-change <br />science. <br />All open-ended responses are included in Appendix C. <br />Key Themes <br />Several themes emerged from the survey’s ratings and open-ended responses (for draft packages and <br />participant-built packages). <br /> EmX generates both strong support and strong concern. <br /> Investment in bike/pedestrian access and safety is the leading criterion for ranking packages, <br />ahead of travel time, ridership increase, and both capital and operating costs. Much of the <br />strong EmX support stems from that option’s high level of bike/pedestrian investment. <br /> Much EmX concern cites cost, along with skepticism that it would be ridden enough to justify <br />the cost. Even EmX supporters stated in open-ended comments that they hoped to see detailed <br />information about funding and return on investment. <br /> Other packages generate less support, but also less concern. By a narrow margin, Package B has <br />the most favorable ratio of support to concern. <br /> Concern about other packages is somewhat similar to EmX concern in that cost and anticipated <br />lack of ridership are often cited. Other concerns include not enough investment in a preferred <br />corridor and in bike/pedestrian safety. <br /> Support for packages other than EmX is less enthusiastic, with open-ended comments implying <br />pragmatic compromise rather than discovery of an ideal combination. <br /> Significant minorities of people with concerns about the Enhanced Corridor package and <br />Package A cited the need for more investment. <br /> <br />July 15, 2019, Joint Work Session – Item1