TRANSPORTATION RESOURCES

The Transportation Committee examines transportation systems emphasizing increased use of public transportation services and other viable alternatives to reduce vehicle miles traveled. We try to monitor transportation systems and issues so that they reflect the regional needs. We provide action when needed to reflect national, state and regional League positions on transportation that emphasize safe, secure means of travel, serves all residents, honors the environment, integrates with land use policy and is cost effective.

BART Board Meeting, 11/16/2017

WAS THERE A QUORUM? Yes | WAS THE AGENDA AVAILABLE IN ADVANCE AS REQUIRED? Yes | WAS THERE SUFFICIENT TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS? Yes

NUMBER OF PUBLIC SPEAKERS: some (6-19)

CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS OR TOPICS OF MOST CONCERN: The longest discussion, over an hour, was on renovating the 175 escalators, many of them very old. The Board has already authorized the money, for the most part.  The biggest problem, it appears, is that there aren’t enough licensed escalator technicians and that industry pays more and has better working conditions than BART.  When one director asked staff why techs do stay, the answer was, “loyalty.” It’s a very long term project. There was a disagreement, 1 director v. most of the others, on the value of upgrading certain of the bike parking facilities. That one director, clearly, thought that bike parking only benefits a small portion of BART riders, from whom the revenue is not worth much attention. Other directors feel that providing bike parking facilities provides benefit for all BART riders. Long discussion about the fare structure and parking lots and fees at the three new stations of the BART Antioch extension.

ISSUES PARTICULARLY RELEVANT TO LEAGUE POSITIONS: I’m not aware of any.

YOUR OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE MEETING: This is the first time that I’ve actually noticed one director become clearly irritated at another, suggesting that they shouldn’t “relitigate” issues that have already been decided and are enshrined in BART policy. He, later, apologized for his stern-ness.

Dan Barki Observer

TRANSPORTATION – SURFACE

(Updated 5/2012) (Reviewed 20160

Support a long-term, comprehensive planning process consistent with the comprehensive Bay Area plan and growth management framework (currently ABAG’s plan) to promote compact, transit-oriented growth patterns served by an efficient, interconnected, multi-modal transportation network Support planning processes that consistently involve public participation designed to include:

a. outreach to all communities, with particular attention to those that are underserved by public transit;

b. presentations that are simple, clear, and easily comprehended by a public not versed in transportation acronyms and jargon, and that are provided in the languages appropriate to non-English-speaking persons;

c. follow-up evaluation by participants that includes measurement of their satisfaction with the materials and the presentation and their confidence that their needs have been understood and are being addressed. Support a transportation system that offers viable alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle use, that is designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and single-occupancy vehicle use , and that is:

 a. multi-modal, b. efficient, c. convenient, d. reliable, e. cost-effective, f. accessible to people with disabilities, g. equitable, and h. safe.

1) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as the currently designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), should develop criteria and a process for evaluating all applicable modes of public transit and pedestrian and bicycle alternatives as a framework for testing proposals in order to build the most effective regional transportation system.

2) The MPO should develop criteria and a system for allocating state and federal transportation funds to encourage compact, transit-oriented growth patterns, with:

a. an analysis of potential transportation investments that includes their effects on future land uses in and beyond the Bay Area; b. criteria for evaluating alternative transportation investments that include reasonable fares, environmental effects on health (including air and water quality, noise reduction), on the production of greenhouse gas emissions, and on agriculture and natural resources ; c. the analyses are to be presented as public information prior to selection of projects; d. the distribution of funds is to be tied to cooperative local land use planning

3) Bay Area transit systems should be linked into an efficient, reliable, convenient and affordable regional transit network with:

a. attention to reasonable, fares, reduction of travel times, extensive hours of service, and good feeder service; b. easily comprehended materials describing routes, schedules, and transit hubs; and c. a fare payment method that can be used on all systems.

4) Good service is to be encouraged by:

a. monitoring the relative efficiency of various systems, and b. maintaining transit system options to mitigate interruptions in service (disasters, strikes) and to serve needs of people with special limitations

5) Transportation funding should be more reliably consistent with needs and long-term planning (e.g., annual adjustment of the gas tax to cover costs of road maintenance) TRANSPORTATION * AIRPORTS (Updated 5/2000) Support coordination between environmental and land use concerns and the need for aviation services in the Bay Area.

1. Prevention of encroachment by incompatible development through far-sighted planning and consistently enforced zoning ordinances

2. Primary consideration for safety

3. Airport planning and operations compatible with neighboring uses

4. Minimizing noise pollution and limiting to levels non-injurious to health and enjoyment of life with continuing monitoring and use of mitigating technical measures

5. Safe, convenient and preferably mass transit access to airports 6. Improvement of existing airports before new ones are considered, with need, demand and cost taken into account

7. Cooperation among jurisdictions in considering regional airport needs. *Vertical Posit

Bus Systems

AC Transit
American Canyon Transit
Cloverdale Transit
County Connection
Dumbarton Express
Fairfield and Suisun Transit (FAST)
Golden Gate Transit
Muni (SF)
Petaluma Transit
Rio Vista Delta Breeze
SamTrans
Santa Clara VTA
Santa Rosa CityBus
SolTrans
Sonoma County Transit
Tri Delta Transit
Union City Transit
Vacaville City Coach
VINE (Napa County)
WestCAT
WHEELS

Shuttles Serving Rail Stations

Shuttles serving ACE stations
Shuttles serving BART stations
Shuttles serving Caltrain stations
Motorcoaches serving Capitol Corridor stations
Shuttles serving VTA stations

Other Shuttle Systems

Bayview Hunters Point Shuttle
Burlingame Shuttle
Emery Go-Round
Foster City Shuttle
Kaiser San Leandro Hospital Shuttle
Marin Health & Human Services Shuttle
Marin Transit Community Shuttles
Menlo Park Midday Shuttle
Palo Alto Shuttle
Presidio Shuttle
Route 66 Muir Woods Shuttle
San Leandro Links (shuttle)
Stanford Marguerite Shuttle
UC Berkeley Campus Shuttle
West Berkeley Shuttle
Yountville Shuttle

Rail Systems

ACE
Capitol Corridor Intercity Rail
BART
Caltrain
Muni (SF)
Santa Clara VTA

Ferry Systems

Alcatraz Hornblower Ferry
Angel Island/Tiburon Ferry
Blue & Gold Fleet
Golden Gate Ferry

Commercial Bus Carriers

Greyhound Lines

Dial-a-Ride

Calistoga Handy Van
VINE Go (Napa County)

Out Of Region Transit

Amtrak
Lake Transit (Lake Co.)
Mendocino Transit Authority
Modesto Area Express (MAX)
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Sacramento Regional Transit
San Benito County Transit
San Joaquin Regional Transit District
Santa Cruz Metro
Stanislaus Regional Transit
Unitrans (Davis)
Yolobus

Other Transit

Valley of the Moon Commute Club
Marin Commute Club