New High Speed Rail plan offers great benefits to Bay Area

TransForm encourages the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Bay Area agencies, and the High Speed Rail Authority to move forward with the Bay Area strategy that will offer great benefits to the region.

The California High Speed Rail Authority will soon release a new Business Plan to completely revamp this massive infrastructure project. TransForm has been participating in extensive conversations leading up to this new plan, and there are still some issues that need resolution, on the overall statewide approach and some specific geographic areas. TransForm will update our position on the entire Business Plan after it is released.

The new high speed rail plan’s Bay Area strategy offers great benefits to our region and deserves our strong support. On March 28, MTC will vote on a Memorandum of Understanding with the High Speed Rail Authority (“the Authority”), local cities and transit agencies (see MTC agenda, item 7.c.). The MOU is based on the new business plan’s “blended approach” strategy and only deals with projects in the Bay Area. The MOU includes a policy commitment and detailed funding proposal for $1.5 billion worth of projects, TransForm wanted to state a position now, in support of this MOU and the strategy within it.

Since 2000, TransForm has supported all of the major elements of this MOU; Electrification of the Caltrain Corridor, Advanced Signal Systems, and a connection to the Transbay Transit Center in downtown San Francisco Together, the elements would provide cleaner, quieter, faster trains between San Francisco and Silicon Valley while also preparing the region for high-speed rail.

High Speed Rail’s New Business Plan

Led by their new Chair, Dan Richard, the Authority is developing a clear-eyed strategy to phase the development of high speed rail in California. The new Business Plan will ditch the $10+ billion, 220 MPH “test track” to nowhere. Instead it will focus on upgrading existing train systems to ensure there are major near-term benefits, even if future phases and the 220 MPH “bullet train” fail to materialize.

Specifically, the new plan combines the existing commitment to proceed with construction of the first rail segment in the Central Valley with a “bookend” strategy that simultaneously makes improvements in California’s most populous regions and economically vibrant regions, the Bay Area and Southern California.

All of these investments would be designed to allow trains using existing technology to use the tracks while also allowing future high speed trains to use the same tracks. This “blended approach” makes tremendous sense from a transportation perspective. It will bring benefits to millions of existing commuters within just a few years and eliminate the risk of having a massive “stranded asset” – in this case a useless, multi-billion dollar track with no funding source to complete the sections to Los Angeles or San Francisco  – stuck in the middle of the state.

By crafting a plan that will make near-term improvements to a (primarily) two-track system in the Bay Area and Southern California, the new Business Plan should gain the project much needed political support in the urban areas.

Additional Bay Area Considerations:

In the Bay Area, the most controversial part of the original Bay Area proposal was to turn the Caltrain corridor into a 4 track-system, significantly impacting the character of many of the downtowns along the line. This controversy has threatened to derail the entire project.

The new Business Plan provides an elegant solution. The project investments specified in the MOU will be “limited to infrastructure necessary to support a blended system, which will primarily be a two-track system shared by both Caltrain and high-speed rail.” Using two tracks for almost all the Caltrain corridor should avoid much of the opposition that faced the 4-track approach. Occasional passing tracks will allow high-speed trains to share tracks with Caltrain’s Baby Bullet and Local services. It is important that the environmental review cover only this primarily two-track system, to obviate concern that this MOU may be a cover for the Authority’s original proposal.

TransForm is grateful to all the leaders, such as Congresswoman Anna Eshoo, State Senator Joe Simitian, and Assemblymember Rich Gordon, who pushed on the Authority to develop a plan that is financially responsible and that will reduce community impact. We are thrilled that MTC and the other entities signing the MOU were able to work through the specific issues quickly.

The MOU lays out a funding plan that will electrify the Caltrain corridor and install Advanced Signal Systems. Both of these improvements will not only prepare the region for high speed rail, but will also reduce Caltrain’s operating costs and improve performance. The MOU also includes a commitment to build the connection to the Transbay Transit Center in downtown San Francisco. The downtown connection would dramatically improve Caltrain’s usefulness and, combined with electrification it would provide cleaner, quieter, faster trains between San Francisco and Silicon Valley.

MTC and the other agencies should pass this resolution and support the MOU now. The Authority is is in a race to get the project off the ground to meet impending deadlines; including legislative approval this spring and deadlines to spend the federal stimulus dollars.  Several transit agencies in Southern California are now supporting a blended approach for that region, including on MetroLink’s corridor connecting Palmdale to LA’s Union Station. 

It is also important to note that the MOU specifies that all the Bay Area projects will go through project-level environmental reviews (CEQA and NEPA) regulations. The Authority will not seek exemptions from environmental review at the project level. These reviews will allow additional community concerns and environmental impacts to be addressed.

Next Steps

California is going to grow. By 2050, we may have 60 million neighbors. We need to decide how we want to accommodate the growing travel demand. If we don’t provide access through effective transit, that demand will lead to wider highways and more airports.

The incremental approach of the new Business Plan makes sense. There are still statewide and geographic-specific issues TransForm is discussing with the Authority. These include the financing plan, mitigations for low-income communities in the Central Valley, strategies to improve land uses and connectivity (especially in the Central Valley), and loss of habitat. We will have a statement on the overall Business Plan soon after it is released.

Right now, the Authority, MTC, and other Bay Area agencies should move the Bay Area MOU forward.

MTC Express Lanes: Flawed Plan, Needs Public Planning

On September 28, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission approved submitting an application to the California Transportation Commission for authority to build a network of Express Lanes. The proposed 270-mile network, which will allow solo-drivers to pay their way into HOV lanes, would cost $6.4 billion to build, yet MTC held no public planning meetings on the project.

At the meeting, TransForm asked Commissioners to initiate a transparent public planning process for the Bay Area Express Lane Network, in parallel with the CTC application. In doing so, we recommended that the process should:

  • Fully integrate and expand express buses, vanpools, and carpools to maximize benefits for all of us based on best practices from around the U.S.
  • Analyze how low-income commuters in the Bay Area, already burdened by the highest combined costs for transportation and housing in the entire country, can benefit from the network, and
  • Ensure that this multi-billion dollar transportation project meets our SCS targets and significantly reduces greenhouse gases and the amount we drive

TransForm also presented the results of an independent analysis of MTC’s Express lane application that we had requested from Professor Deb Niemeier, who is with the UC Davis Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Professor Niemeier identified several weaknesses in MTC’s method for evaluating the project, stating “we find MTC’s evaluation to be an overly optimistic portrayal of project benefits that ignores climate and equity impacts.” The analysis shows that the project is likely to have a negative climate impact in the long run unless the project is revised to have a focus on promoting transit and other alternatives, rather than lane expansions. The assessment also makes a powerful call for conducting a real equity analysis, based on race as well as income. The full analysis is available here.

Several Commissioners echoed these concerns and spoke in support of having a public planning process. Committee Chair James Spering and MTC executive staff stated that they will hold planning meetings. But MTC Executive Director Steve Heminger stated that he wanted a “clean” resolution authorizing the CTC application, without any commitments to future planning processes. The Commission voted to proceed with the application with no requirement for a public planning process.

Given the history of this project, in which previously promised public meetings have not been held, TransForm continues to be concerned. To our knowledge, MTC has no plans to hold any planning meetings about the network as a part of the SCS/RTP process, where this planning should take place. We understand that planning for the network authorized in the approved application may begin sometime next year.

TransForm continues to believe that Express Lanes could be a good step towards equitable road pricing, if they create more transportation choices and support access for low-income residents, but that MTC’s current approach will not do so. We will continue to follow this planning process and urge MTC to engage in public planning to improve this multi-billion dollar project.

Read more about why we think the Bay Area deserves a better Express Lanes plan.

You can find links to MTC’s materials on the proposed Express Lane network in the Sep 9 Planning Committee packet (agenda item #2) and Sep 28 MTC packet (agenda item #9).

For more information, contact Manolo González-Estay.

The Bay Area deserves a better Express Lane plan

LATE-BREAKING NEWS! Just-released independent analysis is a powerful critique of MTC Express lane application: “we find MTC’s evaluation to be an overly optimistic portrayal of project benefits that ignores climate and equity impacts.” See the analysis by Professor Deb Niemeier, from the UC Davis Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering.

Do you ever sit alone in traffic, watching carpools and buses whiz by in the carpool lane, and wish you too could escape the gridlock? Would you like the option to buy into the carpool lane or to have better public transit options so you wouldn’t be stuck in a car in the first place?

“Express lanes” sell available space in carpool lanes to solo drivers and can use the revenues for transportation improvements along the same corridor. But the Bay Area is falling behind other regions of California in providing these new transportation options. Los Angeles will soon open a network of express lanes, using the revenue for new, speedy public transportation options. San Diego will use half its express-lane revenue for buses and vanpools.

Yet our Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) just released a $6.4billion express lanes plan that calls for more lanes … but no new transit or vanpooling options.

How can this be? How could we get a plan like this from the same regional decision-makers who recently set goals to cut transportation costs for low-income residents and reduce the need for us to drive so much?

The problem is that this new plan was developed with no public planning process. Over the past year, MTC spent over a million dollars on consultants, did not hold promised planning meetings, and brought a plan forward after submitting it to the state. Elected officials on the Commission were presented with no alternatives to choose from and no time to consider changes. The result is a network riddled with flaws.

An earlier version of this plan was said to have generated billions for public transportation and other transportation priorities. But with a slower economy and less traffic now predicted, the new plan requires public subsidies on top of the tolls we’d pay. Because the plan does not pursue creative and innovative solutions, such as ones San Mateo County’s planners are considering, it provides few benefits to commuters headed to downtown Oakland, San Francisco, or the Peninsula. And even though the $6.4 billion express lane network would be one of the most expensive transportation projects of our generation, MTC claims there is no need to consider the impacts on low-income residents.

With all these flaws, MTC’s own Policy Advisory Council recommended against the plan. With a looming state deadline and despite its flaws, MTC Commissioners will likely approve a proposal to seek authority for the network at their September 28th meeting. True, this authority will only be an initial step. But given the size and impact of this project and its planning history, the public needs more assurances now that the project will be done right. We don’t deserve a plan that would have us pay more and drive more.

At their meeting, Commissioners need to insist that we design something better. MTC should commit to creating a plan, through a transparent public process, based on best practices from around the country. The plan should fully integrate and expand express buses, vanpools, and carpools to maximize benefits for all of us. We need to understand how low-income commuters in the Bay Area, already burdened by the highest combined costs for transportation and housing in the entire country, can benefit from the network. We need to make sure that this multi-billion dollar transportation project significantly reduces greenhouse gases and the amount we drive.

Planners and elected officials in other regions are doing it right. Why not here in the Bay Area?

MTC Misses Huge Opportunity in Rushing Flawed Express Lane Proposal

On Friday, Sept 9, the MTC Planning Committee will be asked to approve a multi-billion-dollar express lane network that fails to reach its potential to increase the quality of life for all Bay Area residents.Proposed Express Lane Network

The Bay Area could have a regional roadway network with transit and high-occupancy vehicle lanes seamlessly connecting the region’s jobs centers, providing convenient and swift transit connections through the Bay Area. Planned as a transit system, one that sells excess system capacity to solo-drivers, like the plans in Los Angeles, we could meet our regional environmental goals, the SCS targets while providing new transportation choices.

Express Lanes, particularly through the conversion of existing HOV and all-purpose highway lanes, may be a good step towards equitable road pricing. However there is a lot of devil in the details. We will need to be satisfied on a range of equity, transportation and transportation funding issues before we could support a final project.

Since the last Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) was adopted in 2009, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) staff and consultants have been developing a Bay Area Express Lane Network . After a year of closed-door planning, MTC staff is unveiling their proposal for a network that includes the beginnings of this regional system.

FLAWED PROPOSAL

MTC’s current proposal falls far short of what the Bay Area needs to meet the targets set for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and lowering transportation costs for Bay Area households.

Past proposals were self-financed through toll-collection and even generated over $6 Billion in net revenue that could be used to support transit and other needed services. The latest proposal instead requires a minimum of $500 million infusion of funding from local and regional sources. In fact, since the projections are based on optimistic revenue projections and construction costs, this amount will likely be higher. Further, there is no expected “net revenue” prior to 2030 in their financial model that can be used for transit operations, or offsetting transportation costs for low-income households because all revenues are used to build a larger network based on highway expansion instead of creating transportation options.

TransForm is disappointed with the proposal released on Friday (link here). It includes network extensions that our allies have been trying to stop for years, almost half of the network comes from highway expansion instead of conversion of existing lanes, has no plan to fund transit lines, and explicitly claims that as a mode “choice” there is no need for providing access to low-income individuals.

The Process from here

The project will have its first public discussion next Friday, September 9, when MTC staff will be asking the MTC Planning Committee to recommend asking the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for the authority to build the network. The staff and committee recommendation will then go to the full Commission at their September 28 meeting. MTC has put themselves under a serious time constraint because CTC’s ability to bestow this authority runs out at the end of the year. State law requires that MTC submit the application for CTC’s October meeting, or the project will need to go to the State Legislature for approval, a significantly higher hurdle.

Of our many concerns, a significant one is that MTC is proposing a two-track planning process. Track one is the CTC application, but track two is the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) process, which will likely result in a completely different Express Lane recommendation. If the CTC application is successful, MTC would have the authority to build the CTC network but would be required to return to the State Legislature to request permission to change the network to match the RTP proposal. Why rush one network if you’re planning to build another?

This has happened because MTC staff has left only a month of discussion before they must submit an application to CTC before the state’s authority expires at the end of the year. Commissioners will be in the unfortunate position of having to make significant policy decisions with little room to have an expanded conversation or to ask for important changes to the proposal. This is not a process designed for success. Rushed processes for multi-billion-dollar projects do not lead to solid planning decisions.

What the Commission must do to

These are some of the reasons TransForm believes this proposal is fundamentally flawed. We would prefer that MTC hold off on proposing this network, waiting until the RTP process can identify a network that has solid support across the region.

If, however, Commissioners decide to move forward with a proposal this fall, they must, at a bare minimum, do the following in order to protect the validity of the RTP process:

  1. Remove the I-80 extension from I-505 (Vacaville) to the Yolo county line. This is the only part of the network that was not also listed in the RTP’s proposed core-transit network which was just released two weeks ago. The Commission should not prioritize segments that are already seen as unsupportive of the climate protection goals. If Commissioners are committed to this segment, they should discuss it during the RTP along with all the other segments that are not included in this application.
  1. Include I-880 from I-80 to Hegenberger as Express Lanes in the application. The current application leaves this as a major gap in the network. The proposed network should not include a significant gap around Downtown Oakland, and it certainly shouldn’t cover up the gap by calling for “Operational gap closure” which is only a continuation of current plans for ramp metering, etc. Make it an actual express lane.
  2. Include in the resolution approving the application a statement that MTC intends to create an Express Lanes project that helps the region meet the SCS targets, with special attention to the following SCS Targets:
    1. Reduce per-capita CO2 Emissions from cars and light-duty trucks by 15% by 2035 (Target #1),
    2. Decrease by 10% the share of low-income and lower-middle-income residents’ household income consumed by transportation and housing (Target #7),
    3. Decrease automobile vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita by 10% (Target #9)
  3. While the  RTP process will conduct scenario-level equity analysis, in the resolution approving the application, the Commission should also commit to a project-level equity analysis of the proposed multi-billion-dollar network, including:
    1. Impacts by income and race
    2. Impact low-income household transportation and housing costs
    3. Proposed mitigations

The Express Lane project will be one of the largest projects in MTC’s Regional Transportation Plan when it is completed in two years. While these changes will not fix the fundamental problems with this proposal, they will help the Commission to be consistent with their sustainable-communities planning efforts and honor the upcoming RTP process by making it clear that this application is a part of the overall planning process, not a $3.6-10 billion project that is outside of all the long-term planning.

We look forward to discussions at MTC on September 9th and will post new analyses after that meeting.