1. King County Metro Long Range Public Transportation Plan Kirkland Transportation Commission_042215 April 10, 2015

2. Who is King County today? Accessible services: 1.4 million Contracted service: 20.5 million Vanpool/ Vanshare: 3.4 million Fixed Route service: 120 million Alternative services: 17,000 Grand Total: 145.7 million rides 82% 14% 2%2% 1%1% <1% Metro Ridership (est. 2014)

3. Why now? King County continues to grow Metro, and overall transit ridership continues to grow Metro funding is insufficient Light Rail is expanding Congestion is increasing – limiting growth Travel behaviors and demand are changing

4. What is the Long Range Plan? How Metro will help county grow 2025 and 2040 service networks –Higher levels of detail for frequent and RapidRide like services –Alternative services – service to low density or rural areas Capital investments required to support the network Multiple funding assumptions

5. Regional Coordination Long range transportation decisions being made now will define what transit like for decades to come. WSDOT Statewide Transportation Plan Local Comprehensive Plans PSRC Transportation Futures Long Range Plan Community Transit Long Range Plan Pierce Transit Destination 2040 WSDOT Ferries Long Range Plan Sound Transit Light Rail Integration

6. Coordinated Transit Planning Shared Regional Vision KCM Long Range Transit Plan ST System Development Plan (ST3) KCM Strategic Plan ST Long Range Plan 2013 2014 Coordinated Transit Planning Adopted Policy Direction

7. Planning Process Develop and evaluate 3 Initial Concepts Test different service emphasis, capital infrastructure and integration concepts Initial Concepts to Preferred Concept Use best parts of 3 Initial Concepts in 1 Preferred Concept Preferred Concept to Final Plan Finalize capital, financing & phasing 7

8. Long Range Plan Timeline Hold community visioning event Conduct network workshops to develop preliminary concepts Develop evaluation framework for concepts and feedback Analyze system Identify needs of corridor, jurisdictions and communities Revise and adjust concepts based on stakeholder feedback Refined concepts completed Draft plan shared with community and jurisdictions Input received from jurisdictions and communities and considered Final plan shared with community and jurisdictions Final input received and considered Proposed ordinance transmitted to County Council DISCOVERY Jan – May 2015 ALTERNATIVES May– Dec 2015 PRELIMINARY PLAN Jan – May 2016 Final Plan June – Oct 2016

9. Public Engagement Overview Schedule as of March 9 th Strategic Engagement Plan - condensed JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC STAKEHOLDER OTREACH Standing Committee Briefings ADVISORY GROUPS CAG* TAC* ONLINE ENGAGEMENT Website and social media Online Surveys PUBLIC OUTREACH On the ground Informational materials Open Houses/ Community Meetings Community Partner Meetings PHASEDISCOVERYALTERNATIVESDRAFT Develop Fairs and festivals Maintain Distribute materials, build and update listserv VISIONING EVENT *CAG: Community Advisory Group, TAC: Technical Advisory Committee 9

10. What have we Done? Formed Advisory Committees/Groups Technical Advisory Committee Community Advisory Group Website Survey 2,600 community members from 38 cities Community Visioning Event March 31 st –200 people in attendance Partnering with other stakeholders 10

11. Draft Briefing Book 11

12. Thank You! Long Range Public Transportation Plan http://www.kcmetrovision.org/http://www.kcmetrovision.org/ Staff Contacts: Stephen Hunt – Project Manager, KC Metro stephen.hunt@kingcounty.gov 206-477-5828 Tristan Cook – Community Relations, KC Metro tristan.cook@kingcounty.gov 206-477-3842 Lisa Shafer – Service Element Lead, KC Metro lisa.shafer@kingcounty.gov 206-477-5824

13. Develop Initial Concepts Input on Initial Concepts & Evaluation: Meeting with TAC, CAG, cities, Steering Committee and Metro Staff Concept variables Service Emphasis Capital Investments Sound Transit integration 13

14. Draft Initial Concepts FREQUENTCOVERAGEEXPRESS/PEAK Frequent Express/PeakLocal EXISTING* *Existing frequent and express services do not all meet future standards 14

15. Evaluation Criteria TopicKing County Metro Evaluation MetricsST Access to Transit Proximity of population to transit stops and P&R’s  Proximity of jobs to transit stops Proximity of minority and low-income population to transit How people get to transit stops (car, walking, bike, etc.) Transit Connections Population with convenient access to jobs and school via transit  Use and Efficiency Public transit ridership by type  % of travel by transit Countywide Efficiency measures Use of transit-priority infrastructure How late or early do the buses run 15

16. Access to Transit Today Population within a ¼ mile to ½ mile of a transit stop Demographic Group All Service Frequent Service General population 68%40% Minority 71%41% Low-income 81%51% Existing Transit Footprint 16

17. Jobs Accessible via Transit – 2040 Jobs accessible within 30 minutes via transit is estimated to be highest in: Downtown Seattle University District West Seattle Downtown Bellevue Eastgate Factoria