Laserfiche WebLink
40„. Comprehensive Transit Service Plan <br /> F.ve RE 11 TRANSIT Executive Summary <br /> Additional routes to destinations outside the City of Everett would be encouraged <br /> under appropriate circumstances, once the demand for services by Everett residents, <br /> employers or businesses has been documented. <br /> Fixed-route services would continue to be closely monitored to maintain productivity <br /> goals. However, broader minimum service frequency standards would be observed, <br /> given sufficient financial resources. <br /> Additional service improvements to the fixed route network could be increased <br /> frequency or span of service of existing fixed routes, the development of new routes <br /> or the development of new classes of service to destinations both within and outside <br /> of the City of Everett. New services could be added when dictated by identified <br /> demand, even if the additional costs might require new or expanded sources of <br /> operating revenues. <br /> Transfer connections would be permitted to Sound Transit and Community Transit <br /> services at the Everett Station, in south Everett and possibly at other identified <br /> locations outside the City of Everett. <br /> Paratransit Services <br /> In the Enhanced Alternative, paratransit services would operate under essentially <br /> the same eligibility policies as in the Current Operations Alternative, although the <br /> service area could ultimately be significantly expanded. <br /> It is estimated that, under the Enhanced Alternative, paratransit service hours, costs <br /> and vehicle requirements could increase as much as 15% above that of existing <br /> operations. <br /> Alternatives Evaluation <br /> The three alternatives were evaluated upon a number of operating characteristics, <br /> including vehicle requirements and hours of operation. Figure 7 shows the relative <br /> bus requirements for the three alternatives. <br /> The three service alternatives were also given a more thorough evaluation based <br /> upon criteria developed during the course of this project. Table 7 summarizes the <br /> rankings of the alternatives in each criteria category. Since this evaluation was <br /> based upon a ranking of systems, lower scores reflect more desirable characteristics. <br /> This evaluation led to the Enhanced Alternative being identified as the preferred <br /> alternative for the Comprehensive Plan Update and the basis for more detailed <br /> analysis of programs, costs and revenues. <br /> Perteet Engineering,Inc. Page xx <br />