Agenda Packet 7-15-19 Work Session

Home Browse Search

MovingAhead Spring 2019 Outreach Summary 22 Within each level, people named the five evaluation criteria that most influenced their choices: Highest Investment  Bike/Ped: 56  Ridership: 47  Travel Time: 43  Disadvantaged: 35  Development: 31 Medium-high Investment  Bike/Ped: 41  Ridership: 33  Travel Time: 40  Disadvantaged: 31  Capital Cost: 27 Middle Investment  Bike/Ped: 24  Travel Time: 22  Operating Cost: 25  Capital Cost: 21  Ridership and Trees tie: 20 each Medium-low Investment  Capital Cost: 11  Operating Cost: 9  Bike/Ped and Trees tie: 6 each  Disadvantaged and Travel Time tie: 5 each Low Investment  Operating and Capital Cost tie: 17 each  Relocations: 12  Acquisitions: 9  Public Support: 8  Parking: 7 Bike/Ped, Ridership, Travel Time and Disadvantaged were named frequently at the higher investment levels, but were supplanted by Operating Cost and Capital Cost at lower investment levels. Open-ended Responses Participants were asked what more the project team needed to know as they refined the final package. Answers covered a broad range of territory — including advocacy for both spending more and spending less; pegging spending to various criteria including climate goals and ridership goals; trees, specific transportation modes, roads and bus lines, and more — without a dominant trend. In the final part of the survey, participants were asked what else they would like to tell the project team. Many responses were statements for or against public transit or the Lane Transit District in general, or EmX more specifically. Other submissions included an extensive, alternative view of climate-change science. All open-ended responses are included in Appendix C. July 15, 2019, Joint Work Session – Item1