Appendix O - Waupaca County Wisconsin Transportation.pdf

Appendix O Transportation Feasibility Study

Waupaca County, Wisconsin December 5, 2024

2Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Executive Summary This transportation study was conducted to facilitate Waupaca County’s assessment of existing and potential new transportation services and programs. Waupaca County has a unique set of mobility challenges due to its rural nature. The number of rural healthcare facilities is declining nationwide. Both employers and stores are widely dispersed. Waupaca does not have enough population density to support fixed route public transit services.

Most of the current rides provided outside the city limits of Clintonville, Waupaca and New London rely on volunteer driver networks. By nature, volunteer programs are inconsistent in the vehicles used and driver availability. As such, volunteer networks are difficult to scale to meet community mobility needs. A volunteer driver pool is much more difficult to recruit than dedicated, paid drivers.

The cities of Waupaca and Clintonville contract with a taxi company to provide rides on dedicated vehicles. They and the ADRC require that rides be booked 24 to 48 hours in advance. Advanced reservation services do not meet the immediate transportation needs of Waupaca County residents. They aren’t structured to provide same-day rides to pharmacies or medical appointments. One can’t predict the need to ride from work to deal with family emergencies.

The process used by this transportation study had these often-concurrent components:

services and programs,

• Selection of one scenario as the recommended ideal transportation service or program.

The scope also asked the consulting team to elaborate on the specifics of the recommended service by:

local match,

area.

This study suggests methods to improve coordination of all Waupaca County

3Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report transportation services. These methods would leverage economies of scale to support efficiency. The recommended technologies would improve the on-time performance of rides.

The County retained a consultant team led by agape Mobility. agape Mobility focuses on developing community-based mobility services. Yaffe Mobility provided nearly five decades of transit planning, oversight and operations experience. RouteSprout analyzed data and identified transit potential and community transportation needs.

The study recommendations are meant to inform the next steps necessary to improve service coordination to enhance existing ride programs, and to develop new transportation services and programs throughout Waupaca County.

This Executive Summary provides a high-level overview of the study’s findings and recommendations. This should be read as a companion to the full transportation feasibility study Final Report.

Needs Assessment Findings Several key mobility needs and opportunities were revealed. These became apparent in the market analysis and public and stakeholder engagement process. These are summarized below.

LACK OF MOBILITY OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC

The County lacks demand-based or same day transportation services for residents.

Current programs require 24-72 hours’ notice. But, Catch-a-Ride has recently procured a dispatching system that provides on-demand transportation services. Many current transportation programs supported by the County and two cities are not open to all residents. Most are focused on older adults and younger adults with disabilities. One was designed to connect residents lacking access to a car with jobs. Funding rules for specialized transportation require riders to meet specific classifications. Waupaca County also lacks both a concentrated employment activity center and compact higher-population neighborhoods. These are necessary to support traditional fixed-route transit services.

EXISTING SERVICE DATA

Understanding community transportation needs includes data analysis. Population and employment density are just one factor in determining community transportation needs.

Reviewing past ride data as well as demand modeling provides deeper understanding.

We need to know where people need to travel to and from. Only Catch-a-Ride had complete historical data available. The ADRC data provided lacked specificity in some trips. Neither the city of Clintonville nor Waupaca programs provided historical data. The study team had to rely on census tract and block data as the primary indicator for data modeling.

4Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

SERVICE COORDINATION

Currently, only two county-wide services operate in Waupaca County:

In addition to these county-wide services, the cities of Clintonville, New London and Waupaca each operate city-based transportation services.

All services currently operate independently from one another. Coordination and collaboration are restricted due to program funding rules and lack of attention. This is a very common challenge in US-based public transit services. Funders are fearful of duplication of service and/or paying twice for the same type of service. Medicaid non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) services are discouraged from blending rides from other programs due to prolific findings of fraud, waste and abuse. In positive contrast, WisDOT staff are encouraging collaboration and blending services. They see this approach as more rider centric. They specifically encourage coordination within rural communities such as Waupaca.

PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER SUPPORT FOR COMMUNITY-BASED

TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

The Waupaca stakeholders have shown willingness to collaborate in improving transportation services. This attitude is shared by both cities that receive 5311 transportation funds for intracity rides. Additionally, several employers and healthcare providers are engaged and invested with both the Catch-a-Ride and ADRC community transportation services.

ALTERNATIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES

Analysis of the data shows that traditional fixed route transit is not a viable service option for Waupaca County. The study has responded by focusing on small demand-based transit services. Community travel demand and funding availability are prime considerations. Four alternative on-demand strategies were evaluated to address the identified public transportation needs and opportunities. These strategies were suggested by population, available ride data, community input and evaluation criteria.

These are presented in a set of four final service alternatives. These alternatives provide a range of strategies: demand response, flex service, commingled service and a hybrid variety of on-demand microtransit.

Ultimately, the study suggests Waupaca County develop a Coordinated Transportation Service. All current service programs would be included. Funding should be sought to continue the provision of these rides. Capacity would be increased through an on-demand microtransit service. That service would link the cities of Waupaca and New London. Due to the June, 2025 expiration of current funding, bridge funding is needed for the Waupaca County Catch-a-Ride program. Funding is required from July 1 to December 31, 2025.

5Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

NEW ZONE-BASED MICROTRANSIT SERVICE

The cities of Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville have pockets of moderate-to-high population and employment density. Smaller concentrations of moderate density are found in Manawa, Weyauwega, and Iola. These five communities also have the highest transit need in the County, though insufficient for fixed route transit. Their population subgroups nationally show high propensities to use transit. They also have some land-uses and activity centers that tend to generate most transit trips.

Study recommendations for 2025 include:

• Funding for the microtransit service for and between the cities of Waupaca and New London

Section 4 provides more information on service scenarios, demand, and recommendations.

FUNDING AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS

Implementing a public transportation service is a complex undertaking. If the County elects to move forward, the following primary steps will be required:

• Identify and Secure Funding Sources: The County is eligible for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5311 (Non-Urban) grant funds. This grant can be used for both operating and capital costs. FTA Section 5311 will provide up to 50% of annual operating costs. The County, fare revenues, and other sources would provide the other half. FTA Section 5311 provides a match of up to 80% of total capital costs. Additionally, up to 10% state funding for capital expenses could be obtained. The County and its partners would provide the remaining 10%. The County must apply with WisDOT by December 13, 2024, to become an eligible subrecipient of these funds. This process begins in the fall of each year, with grant awards announced each spring. The County and the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission must include the requested funding by project in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).

• Select a Service Delivery Method: Three service options are available to the County. First, the County could directly operate and maintain the system with County staff and fixed assets. Second, the County could procure system operations and maintenance from a third-party contractor. That contractor could provide or lease equipment and an operations facility. Maintenance could be provided by a subcontractor. The third option is a hybrid. The County would provide the operations facility while contracting for operations and maintenance.

The Consulting Team recommends the second option. The County should procure the services and equipment. The contractor would be reimbursed on a

6Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report per revenue service hour basis.

OPERATION AND ORGANIZATION OF COORDINATED SERVICES

Current services can gradually become a unified service offering. This phased process would involve service oversight; procurement of new and blended services as well as fixed assets; and a focus on reducing duplication.

ESTABLISH A COUNTY COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION: A

CTC is required by Wisconsin legislation. This appointed public body would guide the implementation of the new service and policies. This commission would develop and manage the County’s Coordinated Service Plan.

COORDINATED SERVICE PLAN: This plan would focus on the maintenance and enhancement of mobility programs in Waupaca County. The plan would include strategies to blend and adapt program funding. Cost sharing services would be identified to avoid duplication. For example, procurement of a single call center technology platform to support all services.

• Procure Service Contractor: For the new microtransit services, a service contractor will need to be procured. This procurement process typically takes about six months. If a transition is required to a new contractor, an additional three months is needed for contractor mobilization. For this reason, the Consulting team recommends a short-term sole-source contract in 2025 as an interim step. An RFP would be issued for the new contract to take effect in 2026.

• Transportation Provider Network Manager: The County Coordinated Transportation Commission should procure an entity to serve as the transportation provider network manager. A transportation network manager would plan, oversee, and optimize the entire transportation network. The manager would develop, maintain, and oversee provider relationships. The manager would also oversee vehicle operations including costs. The CTC would expect the manager to ensure compliance with regulations.

Fixed Assets: Procurement of vehicles from a current local or statewide contract using “off-the-shelf” small transit vehicles could take 6 months. Some dealers have vehicles that are already available. A new contract would require six months for the procurement process. Development of an operations and maintenance facility requires the longest lead-time and would be expensive. The County either should identify an existing appropriate facility or require that the contractor provide a facility. The County should also assess the usefulness of the existing service fleet.

Common Platform: The reviewed alternative service scenarios all required one technology platform. One technology platform would efficiently:

• Book ride requests, 7Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

the Federal Transit Administration.

One technology platform can reassign rides among ride providers and vehicles to ensure on-time performance. As such, the consulting team is recommending Waupaca County acquire on-demand technology for use by dedicated drivers, volunteers, and non-dedicated drivers to manage all ride requests. One technology platform is needed to ease collaboration among mobility funders and rider providers.

Assuming this collaborative approach and technology platform, the final recommendations have been defined as:

Final Report Anatomy

Comprehensive Analysis and Data Gathering

Service Design, Operational Planning and Policy Review

6. Review of Existing Services and Program Analysis

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED

9. Service Optimization, Funding and Policy Recommendations

Risk Assessment and Mitigation Strategies

11. Risk Management Report

12. Final Conclusions

10Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Section 2: Comprehensive Analysis and Data Gathering Introduction This transportation feasibility study assesses existing and potential new mobility services and programs for Waupaca County residents and employees. Waupaca County has a unique set of challenges, being rural and lacking the traditional density needed to support fixed route public transit services. This study informs the County of community mobility needs and offers a long-term funding and service strategy in response to those needs.

Study Approach The study was structured to engage the public, coordinate with stakeholders, analyze transportation supply and demand data, and identify gaps and barriers of existing services and programs. The consultant team was required to identify several scenarios and recommend one to sustain, improve, and/or develop new transportation services and programs. The scope also asked the consulting team to elaborate on the specifics of the recommended service by:

transit / transportation services within the County.

The study final report is organized into four main sections as defined below.

Section 2: Comprehensive Analysis and Data Gathering The comprehensive analysis and data gathering effort tasks include:

• Existing Conditions Assessment provides an overview of the existing conditions within Waupaca County that influence the demand for transit. This section also documents the public and private transportation options that currently exist in the County.

• Market Analysis provides a summary of Waupaca demographics, transit need and potential. The market analysis includes an overview of the County and the three largest cities – Waupaca, Clintonville and New London.

• Overview of Existing Services provides a general overview of current public transportation services in Waupaca County.

Section 3: Service Design, Operational Planning and Policy Review The service design, operational planning and policy review includes the following:

11Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Section 4: Service Optimization, Funding and Policy Recommendations This section provides recommended new service design models, ways to optimize existing and future services, organization make-up, funding and policy considerations.

Potential funding opportunities for public transportation are identified. Alternative management models are described for consideration. New policies are suggested for adoption.

Section 5: Risk Assessment and Mitigation Strategies This section provides a summary of risk management strategies for operations, technology, regulatory, and compliance and continued community support with final conclusions.

Project Need Access to reliable transportation is a significant challenge for those Waupaca County residents who are unable to drive, can’t afford a car, and don’t have a family member or friend to provide a ride. Even if a household has one working vehicle, that may be used by the family breadwinner during the day and unavailable to others. Lack of mobility options is particularly concerning for those who live in rural areas. Their destinations are not within walking distance. The lack of mobility constrains the quality of life of residents. They don’t have easy access to job training, work, medical and rehabilitative appointments, or grocery/pharmacies. The ability of employers to attract and retain labor is limited, resulting in negative economic impacts. Improving access to transportation for these vulnerable populations, the County’s rural residents, is fundamental to improving both their quality of life and continuity of business. Access to sustainable transportation funding is also a significant challenge impacting both public and specialized transportation services and programs in Waupaca County.

Project Oversight The study recommendations are meant to play a significant role in informing the next steps necessary to enhance existing or develop new transportation services and programs throughout Waupaca County. A stakeholder working group was created to provide oversight for the project and is comprised of representatives from the following organizations:

12Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Stakeholder and Public Engagement County of Waupaca staff organized a kickoff meeting with the stakeholder group.

The stakeholders provided direction and guidance to the consulting team for public participation. The group suggested a combination of independent interviews with the three largest cities and key community stakeholders who have been focused on improving public transportation. Tasks included reviewing existing service data from the four primary services operating in the County and providing any alternatives service scenarios that could support transit need and increase service optimization.

The consulting team devised a public participation strategy that included conducting one–on-one interviews with service providers and community stakeholders, zoom meetings, attending committee meetings, hosting a public workshop and conducting personal calls. Public meeting announcements were also shared through public online postings through the county website and via social media outlets.

Stakeholder Interviews and Meetings The consulting team conducted several interviews and attended meetings with a variety of stakeholders. Below is a summary of interviewees and meetings.

Person Interviewed Organization

Melissa Anderson Waupaca County, Aging and Disability Resource Manager

Jess Betts-Nelson Catch-a-Ride – Feonix Mobility Rising Valerie Lefler Feonix Mobility Rising Aaron Jensen City of Waupaca Caz Muske City of Clintonville Ginger Sowle City of New London Carie Kreps Wegenast Tyson Foods Sandy Popp Options for Independent Living Autumn Nordell Options for Independent Living Crag Poshepny VIP Services Adam Thomas Badger Care Transportation Jeff Mikorski WCEDC Kate Blackburn, Brenna Root Whitby, Mike Zuege, Casey Peters, Craig Moser

ECWRPC

13Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Organization Meeting Date

Waupaca County Catch-a-Ride, Sustainability Committee

August 23, 2024

Waupaca County Catch-a-Ride, Sustainability Committee

October 4, 2024

Waupaca Study Peer Group October 14, 2024 Waupaca County Study Steering Committee

October 17, 2024

Waupaca County Catch-a-Ride Leadership Council

November 7, 2024

Waupaca County Feasibility Study Workshop

November 20, 2024

WisDOT November 22, 2024

Community Workshop On November 20th, Waupaca County held a public workshop consisting of community stakeholders. The County identified several County stakeholders. Invitations were sent to nearly 60 stakeholders. A total of 20 people attended the workshop. The workshop agenda discussed the following items:

Cities of Waupaca, Clintonville and New London

• Service Scenarios

• Open discussion

The consulting team provided an overview of the data analysis of county-wide population density, those individuals with zero to one vehicle households, lower income residents, persons with disabilities, seniors and youth (16-24). This included a review of a county map which illustrated transit need within the county by color (map ###). The data illustrated limited density

14Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report in the cities of Waupaca, New London and Clintonville. Using individual maps (map #, #, #), the team reviewed each city cluster. The preliminary analysis of density, traditional population and group block information does not support traditional fixed route transit within the county. More detail is provided in the Transit Market Analysis section below.

The consultant team shared that the inability to support fixed route transit is not unusual for rural communities.

The consultant team stated they had received trip data from two of the four providers.

This included Catch-a-Ride and Aging and Disability Resources Center (ADRC). Both the Cities of Clintonville and Waupaca were asked for historical data, but neither city nor their service provider(s) could provide that information.

The consulting team addressed preliminary recommendations that included:

• Development of a technology enabled demand-based service which includes both in-advance and same day ride booking / requests.

• Having new and existing services use a common technology / dispatch platform that can accommodate both volunteer and staff drivers.

• Creating a county-wide committee that complies with Wisconsin Transportation Coordinating Committee (TCC) guidelines who would provide oversight for transportation services

After the consultant’s presentation of findings and preliminary recommendations, an open forum was facilitated. From the open discussion, several recommendations were cited from the participants. These include:

• Community focus – participants were unified in all transportation services need to be focused on those community members who need public transportation the most (rider focused).

• County lines and limitations – several participants cited that New London was divided by county lines and expressed concerns that the community didn’t recognize the county line when seeking transportation needs.

• Both representatives from the cities of Clintonville and Waupaca expressed their support to better coordinate existing services. However, they stated they wanted to ensure any new service would enhance their existing services and not duplicate them. They also expressed interest in a common platform that could provide better service efficiencies and data insights.

• Several representatives from healthcare providers stated they often have challenges with providing patients rides, specifically hospital discharges.

15Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

County of Waupaca - Demographics

51,822 Population

8.84% Poverty Rate

(4.69% decrease from 2021)

$69,198

Median Household

Income

(6.34% growth from 2021)

$178,500

Median Property

Value

(11.8% growth from 2021)

45.3 Median Age

(0% change from 2021)

In 2022, Waupaca County, WI had a population of 51.8k people with a median age of 45.3 and a median household income of $69,198. Between 2021 and 2022 the population of Waupaca County, WI grew from 51,769 to 51,822, a 0.102% increase and its median household income grew from $65,070 to $69,198, a 6.34% increase.

The 5 largest ethnic groups in Waupaca County, WI are White (Non-Hispanic) (93.4%), Two+ (Non- Hispanic) (1.68%), Other (Hispanic) (1.37%), Two+ (Hispanic) (1.04%), and White (Hispanic) (0.847%).

None of the households in Waupaca County, WI reported speaking a non-English language at home as their primary shared language. This does not consider the potential multi-lingual nature of households, but only the primary self-reported language spoken by all members of the household.

99.3% of the residents in Waupaca County, WI are U.S. citizens.

In 2022, the median property value in Waupaca County, WI was $178,500, and the homeownership rate was 76.2%.

Most people in Waupaca County, WI drove alone to work, and the average commute time was 24.7 minutes. The average car ownership in Waupaca County, WI was 2 cars per household. Almost 14% of Waupaca County households owned one car or no cars.

16Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

HISTORY

The County was created in 1851 and organized in 1853. It is named after the Waupaca River, a Menominee language name meaning ‘white sand bottom’, ‘pale water’, or ‘tomorrow river. [5]

Ancient indigenous peoples constructed earthworks that expressed their religious and political concepts. An early European explorer counted 72 such earthen mounds in what is now Waupaca County. Many of them in the form of effigy mounds, shaped like “humans, turtles, catfish and others.”[2] There were 52 mounds constructed around what is now called Taylor Lake. Most mounds were lost to agricultural development.

One mound, shaped like a catfish, is still visible in a private yard along County Highway QQ, just east of Taylor Lake. The site was marked by a local women’s club with a commemorative plaque installed on a large stone.[2] Under pressure from European-American development, the Menominee people ceded their title to the United States for these lands by treaty in 1852. Following that, the flow of new migrant settlers greatly increased from the East, with people moving from New England, New York, and Ohio. They developed the land primarily for agricultural use in the early decades, also quickly establishing sawmills on the rivers.

In the 1870s railroads were constructed in the county: the Wisconsin Central in 1872 and the Green Bay and Minnesota Railroad (later known as Green Bay, Minnesota & St.

Paul) in 1873. These improved the county’s connections to markets for its lumber and other products. For a period, entrepreneurs and merchants gained high profits from the lumber industry, establishing many fine homes in the larger cities.

GEOGRAPHY

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the county has a total area of 765 square miles (1,980 km2), of which 748 square miles (1,940 km2) is land and 17 square miles (44 km2) (2.3%) is water.[3] The water includes 22 lakes that form the Waupaca Chain O’ Lakes. These lakes are majority spring fed and connected by the Crystal River outlet.

[4] Waupaca County is also home to Partridge Lake on the Wolf River and the Waupaca River.

DEMOGRAPHICS

As of the census of 2020,[1] the population was 51,812. The population density was

69.3 people per square mile (26.8 people/km2). There were 25,457 housing units at an average density of 34.0 units per square mile (13.1 units/km2). The racial makeup of the county was 93.2% White, 0.6% Native American, 0.5% Asian, 0.4% Black or African American, 1.6% from other races, and 3.7% from two or more races. Ethnically, the population was 3.6% Hispanic or Latino of any race.

MAJOR CITIES

The three largest cities in the County are Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville. New

17Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

London is partly in Outagamie County.

Sources 1 “2020 Decennial Census: Waupaca County, Wisconsin”. data.census.gov. U.S. Census Bureau.

Retrieved July 6, 2022.

2 Waupaca Area Chamber of Commerce 3 “2010 Census Gazetteer Files”. United States Census Bureau. August 22, 2012.

4 “Chain O’ Lakes”. Explore Waupaca Co.

5 “Here’s How Iron Got Its Name”. The Rhinelander Daily News. June 16, 1932. p. 2.

Detailed Data

POPULATION AND DIVERSITY

Waupaca County, WI is home to a population of 51.8k people, of which 99.3% are citizens. As of 2022, 1.31% of Waupaca County, WI residents were born outside of the country (681 people).

In 2022, there were 55.4 times more White (Non-Hispanic) residents (48.4k people) in Waupaca County, WI than any other race or ethnicity. There were 873 Two+ (non- Hispanic) and 710 Other (Hispanic) residents, the second and third most common ethnic groups.

RACE AND ETHNICITY

In 2022, there were 55.4 times more White (Non-Hispanic) residents (48.4k people) in Waupaca County, WI than any other race or ethnicity. There were 873 Two+ (non- Hispanic) and 710 Other (Hispanic) residents, the second and third most common ethnic groups.

3.42% of the people in Waupaca County, WI are Hispanic (1.77k people).

EQUITY

Highest Median Household Income (Total)

In 2022, the tract with the highest Median Household Income (Total) in Waupaca County, WI was Census Tract 1008 with a value of $86,732, followed by Census Tract 1012 and Census Tract 1005, with respective values of $82,257 and $80,101.

The following map shows all of the tracts in Waupaca County, WI colored by their Median Household Income (Total).

18Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

ECONOMY

The economy of Waupaca County, WI employs 26.2k people. The largest industries in Waupaca County, WI are Manufacturing (7,777 people), Health Care & Social Assistance (3,172 people), and Retail Trade (2,782 people), and the highest paying industries are Utilities ($65,227), Manufacturing ($57,163), and Public Administration ($56,149).

EMPLOYMENT

From 2021 to 2022, employment in Waupaca County, WI declined at a rate of −0.434%, from 26.3k employees to 26.2k employees.

The most common job groups, by number of people living in Waupaca County, WI, are Production Occupations (3,944 people), Office & Administrative Support Occupations (2,641 people), and Sales & Related Occupations (2,404 people). This chart illustrates the share breakdown of the primary jobs held by residents of Waupaca County, WI.

19Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY

From 2021 to 2022, employment in Waupaca County, WI declined at a rate of −0.434%, from 26.3k employees to 26.2k employees.

The most common employment sectors for those who live in Waupaca County, WI, are Manufacturing (7,777 people), Health Care & Social Assistance (3,172 people), and Retail Trade (2,782 people). This chart shows the share breakdown of the primary industries for residents of Waupaca County, WI, though some of these residents may live in Waupaca County, WI and work somewhere else. Census data is tagged to a residential address, not a work address.

20Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

EARNINGS BY INDUSTRY

$54,318 Median earning men ± $1,473 $36,062 Median earning women ± $1,906

The industries with the best median earnings for men in 2022 are Information ($67,536), Public Administration ($65,670), and Finance & Insurance, & Real Estate & Rental & Leasing ($64,500).

The industries with the best median earnings for women in 2022 are Wholesale Trade ($49,375), Manufacturing ($47,177), and Public Administration ($46,845).

21Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

POVERTY

8.84% of the population for whom poverty status is determined in Waupaca County, WI (4.44k out of 50.2k people) live below the poverty line, a number that is lower than the national average of 12.5%. The largest demographic living in poverty are Females 55 - 64, followed by Females 75+ and then Males 35 - 44.

The most common racial or ethnic group living below the poverty line in Waupaca County, WI is White, followed by Hispanic and Two Or More.

The Census Bureau uses a set of income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who classifies as impoverished. If a family’s total income is less than the poverty threshold, than that family and every individual in it is considered to be living in poverty. Note that the ALICE index – Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed – has a higher poverty threshold than the census bureau. In Waupaca County, 23% of households have financial hardships according to ALICE while 9% of households are at or below the federal poverty guideline. The ALICE index is built upon necessary household budget levels by category (such as rent, utilities, transportation).

UnitedforALICE.org is supported by local United Ways, corporations, non-profits and foundations.

HOUSING AND LIVING

The median property value in Waupaca County, WI was $178,500 in 2022, which is

0.633 times smaller than the national average of $281,900. Between 2021 and 2022 the median property value increased from $159,600 to $178,500, an 11.8% increase. The homeownership rate in Waupaca County, WI is 76.2%, which is approximately the same as the national average of 64.8%.

People in Waupaca County, WI have an average commute time of 24.7 minutes. They primarily drove alone to work. Car ownership in Waupaca County, WI is approximately the same as the national average, with an average of 2 cars per household.

Median household income in Waupaca County, WI is $69,198. In 2022, the tract with the highest Median Household Income in Waupaca County, WI was Census Tract 1008 with a value of $86,732, followed by Census Tract 1012 and Census Tract 1005, with respective values of $82,257 and $80,101.

HOUSEHOLD INCOME

The following chart display owner-occupied housing units distributed between a series of property tax buckets compared to the national averages for each bucket. In Waupaca County, WI the largest share of households pay taxes in the $3k+ range. The chart below shows the property taxes in Waupaca County, WI compared to national averages.

https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.unitedwaywi.org/resource/resmgr/alice/fact_sheets/waupaca_county__alice_2023_.pdf

22Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

HEALTH

94.1% of the population of Waupaca County, WI has health coverage, with 54.4% on employee plans, 10.7% on Medicaid, 15.9% on Medicare, 11.6% on non-group plans, and 1.49% on military or VA plans.

Primary care physicians in Waupaca County, WI see 1809 patients per year on average, which represents a 2.9% increase from the previous year (1758 patients). Compare this to dentists who see 2714 patients per year, and mental health providers who see 938 patients per year.

By gender, of the total number of insured persons, 50% were men and 50% were women.

PATIENT TO CLINICIAN RATIOS

Primary care physicians in Waupaca County, WI see an average of 1,809 patients per year. This represents a 2.9% increase from the previous year (1,758 patients).

The following chart shows how the number of patients seen by primary care physicians has been changing over time in Waupaca County, WI in comparison to its neighboring geographies.

HEALTHCARE DIVERSITY

23Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

In 2022, insured persons according to age ranges were distributed in 21.8% under 18 years, 17% between 18 and 34 years, 41.9% between 35 and 64 years, and 19.4% over 64 years. By gender, of the total number of insured persons, 50% were men and 50% were women. The following chart shows the number of people with health coverage by gender.

UNINSURED PEOPLE

5.9% Uninsured 54.4% Employer Coverage 10.7% Medicaid 15.9% Medicare 11.6% Non-Group 1.49% Military or VA

24Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

TRANSPORTATION

The most common commute mode in the Couty for 2022

In 2022, 82.5% of workers in Waupaca County, WI drove alone to work, followed by those who carpooled to work (6.94%) and those who worked at home (6.39%). The following chart shows the number of households using each mode of transportation over time, using a logarithmic scale on the y-axis to help better show variations in the smaller means of commuting.

Using averages, employees in Waupaca County, WI have a shorter commute time (24.7 minutes) than the normal US worker (26.7 minutes). Additionally, 2.69% of the workforce in Waupaca County, WI have “super commutes” in excess of 90 minutes.

The chart below shows how the median household income in Waupaca County, WI compares to that of its neighboring and parent geographies.

25Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

CAR OWNERSHIP

The following chart displays the households in Waupaca County, WI distributed between a series of car ownership buckets compared to the national averages for each bucket.

The largest share of households in Waupaca County, WI have 2 cars.

Source: Data USA

Transit Market Analysis

26Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

To understand the need and feasibility of public transportation services in Waupaca County, a transit market analysis was conducted to evaluate the community characteristics and travel patterns that influence the potential demand for transit service.

In addition, data from existing services have been overlayed with population data and to identify key travel patterns. The following sections provide an overview of the components of transit demand, an analysis of the observed population and employment characteristics in the study area, and key travel patterns.

Estimating Transit Demand In traditional, urban settings the demand for public transportation is influenced by a variety of factors. These factors include population and employment density, the prevalence of transportation disadvantaged populations, major activity generators, parking availability and cost, and the monetary and time cost of driving a personal automobile. In most urban settings, population and employment density are typically the most predicative indicators of transit patronage. These transit demand characteristics are much different in rural areas. Rural areas are often characterized by long distances between population centers, poor infrastructure, higher median age populations, and a high reliance on vehicle ownership.

In addition to population and employment, other factors help distinguish transit need and potential in a community. Transit markets are commonly grouped into two categories:

• Discretionary riders are those who have adequate financial and physical means to operate a private automobile but choose to ride transit as a personal choice or out of convenience. Discretionary riders are more commonplace in high-density metropolitan areas, where factors such parking availability and the cost of driving due to long commutes or traffic congestion increase the advantage of riding transit versus driving.

• Transit dependent riders are those who utilize transit services due to lack of financial resources or physical ability to own or operate a personal automobile.

They can also contain individuals who have a physical disability or are older adults with some dexterity limitations. Compared to discretionary riders, transit dependent riders tend to use transit for a larger variety of trip purposes beyond work commuting, including shopping, medical appointments, and social activities.

Transit Potential Transit service is generally most effective and efficient in areas with high concentrations of residents and/or jobs. The transit potential of an area can be assessed by examining the combined population and employment density of the area.

Figure X shows the population density of Waupaca County by block, based on 2020 US Census data. While much of the county has fewer than one person per acre, there are sizable concentrations of moderate population density (6-15 people per acre) in the cities of Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville. Additional pockets of moderate population density are seen in Iola, Weyauwega, Manawa, Marion, Scandinavia, Ogdensburg, Fremont, and King.

27Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Figures X, Y, and Z show more detailed population density maps for the cities of Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville, respectively. These maps show that in all three communities, population density is highest in each city’s traditional core, or central areas with small blocks and grid networks of streets.

28Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

29Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

30Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Figure X shows 2020 employment density in Waupaca County by block, based on 2021 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) data. As with population density, much of Waupaca County has a low employment density. Areas of the county with densities of more than five jobs per acre are concentrated in Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville; and to a lesser degree in Iola, Big Falls, Weyauwega, Manawa, Marion, Scandinavia, Ogdensburg, Fremont, and King.

31Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Figures X, Y, and Z show more detailed employment density maps for the cities of Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville, respectively. In Waupaca, the highest employment density is found along Main Street, between Badger and Union, where there is a mix of cafes, restaurants, and service providers. In addition, there is a high concentration of jobs at the Waupaca Foundry, near Royalton and Tower Road.

In New London, employment density is highest on the periphery of downtown, including a concentration of light industrial employers along Mill Street and Industrial Loop Road;

as well as a retail cluster along W. North Water Street.

In Clintonville, the highest employment density is found in the block of Garfield Avenue

32Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report and 12th Street hosting the City of Clintonville Electric Light and Water Department.

Additionally, there is a large concentration of jobs along Industrial Avenue, between 16th Street and Green Tree Road, including Creative Converting and Walker Forge, both among the largest employers in the county.

33Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

34Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Figure X shows the Transit Potential of Waupaca County, or the combined population and employment densities by block. Higher density can be driven by jobs, housing, or the combination of jobs and housing. In all three cases, higher density is a good predictor of the viability of transit service. The Transit Potential in Waupaca County is greatest, therefore, in the cities of Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville. Smaller pockets of moderate-to-high transit potential (more than 15 people+jobs per acre) are also found in Iola, Weyauwega, Manawa, and King.

35Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Figures X, Y, and Z show more detailed Transit Potential maps for the cities of Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville, respectively. In Waupaca, there are high concentrations of moderate-to-high Transit Potential in the city’s traditional core, along the W. Fulton Street corridor, at the Waupaca Foundry, and in the vicinity of the Veterans Hospital.

In New London, Transit Potential is highest in the city’s traditional core, as well as along the N. Shawano Street corridor, north of Route 54, where there is a mix of mobile home parks, apartments, and retail destinations, including Walmart.

The highest Transit Potential in Clintonville is found in the city’s traditional core, along

36Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report the S. Main Street corridor, south of US 45, and along the Industrial Avenue corridor between 16th Street and Green Tree Road.

37Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

38Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

39Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

Transit Need and Ridership Generators In addition to population and employment density overall, the likely demand for transit service can be assessed by examining the demographics of an area. Certain population subgroups have a relatively higher propensity to use transit as their primary means of transportation than the population as a whole. These groups include:

• Households without access to a vehicle. Families that lack access to a vehicle either for financial or legal reasons often have few mobility options other than public transportation.

• Persons with disabilities. Individuals who are unable to or have difficulty operating a motor vehicle are especially likely to use public transportation services.

• Low-income individuals. Because using transit is often less expensive than owning a car, individuals in low-income households are more likely to rely on transit.

• Young people (age 15-24). National trends have shown that the average age at which Americans are getting driver’s licenses has steadily increased in recent decades.

• Older adults (age 65+). As individuals age, they may be less willing or able to operate a motor vehicle.

Areas with higher concentrations of these populations are also likely to have a higher need for transit services. Using 2022 American Community Survey (ACS) data, the study team calculated the concentration of each demographic group by Census Block Group.

For each demographic analysis, a Jenks Natural Breaks Classification Method was used to assign each Block Group to one of five density categories. A points system was employed by which 1 point was awarded to Block Groups with the lowest concentrations of the population subgroup being examined, and five points were given to Block Groups with the highest concentration of that particular demographic category.

Figure 2 shows the composite Transit Need map based on the sum of scores for each demographic analysis. For example, if a Block Group falls in the highest density category for each of the five demographic analyses, it receives a Transit Need score of 25 (5+5+5+5+5). The lowest possible Transit Need score is 5 (1+1+1+1+1).

While Transit Potential is an absolute measure of density, Transit Need is a relative measure that compares how each block group stacks up to other block groups in the study area in terms of concentration of population subgroups with a high propensity to use transit. As a whole, Waupaca County has relatively low Transit Need. However, as shown in Figure X below, concentrations of relatively high transit need can be found in the cities of Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville; and to a lesser extent in Iola, Weyauwega, and Manawa.

40Transportation Feasibility Study - Final Report

In addition to density and demographics, transit use is also influenced by the built environment. In particular, there are certain land uses – such as multi-family housing, major grocery and retail centers, medical facilities, educational institutions, and civic and community centers – that tend to generate transit trips at a higher rate than other land-uses. A robust mix of these activity centers is key to ensuring strong ridership demand for any transit service.

Figure X, Figure Y, and Figure Z below show the Transit Need for the cities of Waupaca, New London, and Clintonville, respectively, as well as key points of interest or prospective transit ridership generators in each city.