|
|
Bay Area Transportation and Land Use Coalition
REGIONAL MEETING
Wednesday, April 17, 2002
5:30 to 7:30 p.m.
Sierra Club, 85 Second St., 3rd Floor
San Francisco
MINUTES
1. Announcements/Revisions to Agenda Nominations for Steering Committee (now officially the Board of Directors) will take place in June. Orientation for new and existing members will take place in August.
Transportation Choices Forum is no longer a separate entity. TCF work will take place as a Research Group project within the Coalition. Researchers and Advisory Committee will be expanded, and meetings will be kept to a minimum and much of the work will take place via email.
2. Raising the Toll to Pay for Transit
Rapport, consultant to the Senate Select Committee on Transportation, presented the current proposal and took feedback from attendees on the $3 toll proposal by Senator Perata. Total estimate is $120 - $140 million per year.
$1 toll increase spending proposal >
Four overall principles were proposed:
Money will go for new services only, which is enhancements of existing transit. No spending on existing deficits.
Split between capital and operating costs - possible 50/50.
Nexus to bridge corridors and approaches. Money has to affect these directly.
Best “bang for the buck”. Performance measures will be established. Money to be used for “best solution for regional transit that affects nexuses to the bridge”, since money comes from bridge users.An Advisory Committee will be created to develop specific spending plan. Needs consensus for political reasons. Plan would then be put on November 2004 ballot. Ezra is still awaiting word from the lawyers but it is likely that if plan passes through legislature with 2/3 vote, then simple majority public vote to pass, otherwise 2/3 public vote needed.
Targets include: Express buses, HOV improvements to approaches, water transit improvements, commuter rail, BART capacity increases. Money will help existing networks work better, not for big budget projects.
Action - support for the initial proposal and principles with amendment to
- there should be a strong focus on funding transit operations than 50/50
- there should be measures for environmental impacts and cost-effectiveness.
VOTE : 12 Yea’s, 0 No’s – principles supported by Coalition 1. Regional Smart Growth Strategy; - Stuart Cohen
Spring workshops taking place now.
* see schedule below
; Smart Growth Zones – Summary of specific proposals that emerged from the summit. * see draft summary below
Gov. Davis is supposedly supporting a model Smart Growth ordinance!
Senate Bill 1521 requires the Governor's Office of Planning and Research to develop a state model zoning ordinance that emphasizes economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable land use policies. Cities that adopt it would get prioritized for certain state funds.
– consider support for SB 1521. State Legislation is HOT!
-Kristi Kimball of STPP discussed what’s hot, including SB 1555 and SB 1636 -* see details below - what the reps from your district will be deciding, and what you can do.– consider support for SB 1555, SB 1636. BART Shortfall &Parking Charges
; - Stuart Cohen, Jeff Hobson
Discussion – “make parkers subsidize non-drivers”, “charge market-rate at all BART station parking lots”, “no additional parking system-wide”.“Support and actively campaign for parking charges at all BART parking lots, and undertake a more comprehensive review of BART fee structures and policies, linking fares, parking charges, congestion pricing and feeder transit services.” – consider support for Coalition revenue recommendations. ; Safe Routes to Transit and the Regional Bicycle Agenda
" - Dave Snyder, Executive Director of the SF Bicycle Coalition, presented the proposal for a regional Safe Routes to Transit program. * see memo below Coalition discussed the proposal and decided whether to coordinate a campaign for its passage.
"Discussion – “have EBBC (Robert Raburn) explain specific financial needs at next regional meeting”, “create program now, determine dollar amount later”, “is dollar amount proposed exaggerated?” > consider support for Safe Routes to Transit program and try to get such a program implemented immediately at MTC..
Presentation by Our New Cousin in Sacramento
"t - Terry Preston (of Odyssey) is helping coordinate The California Alliance for Transportation Choices (CATC), the new ‘BATLUC’ for all of CA. * see below for CATC core principles CATC asked BATLUC to join. – consider joining CATC as affiliate or member
VOTE: 10 Yea’s, 0 No’s – membership supported by Coalition Adjourn – NOTE NEXT MEETING MOVED to Thursday May 16, 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. Rod Diridon, Chair of the High Speed Rail Authority, will give a presentation on HSR proposal, take questions, and seek a support position from the Coalition.
The schedule of spring Regional Smart Growth workshops is as follows:
Saturday, April 13, 2002; Pickleweed Park Community Center
50 Canal Street, San Rafael
Saturday, April 20, 2002 Sonoma Steele Lane Community Center
415 Steele Lane, Santa Rosa
Saturday, May 4, 2002; San Francisco Chinese Cultural Center of SF
750 Kearny (in the Holiday Inn)
Saturday, May 4, 2002; Santa Clara Mountain View Community Center
201 South Rengstorff Avenue
Saturday, May 11, 2002; San Mateo; San Mateo County Expo Center
2495 South Delaware, San Mateo
Saturday, May 11, 2002; Solano; Jelly Belly Candy Company
1 Jelly Belly Lane, Fairfield
Saturday, May 11, 2002; Contra Costa* Location to be Determined
Saturday, May 18, 2002; Alameda ; San Leandro Public Library (Main Branch)
300 Estudillo Avenue, San Leandro
(at East 14 " St.)
Saturday, May 18, 2002; NapaLas Flores Community Center
4300 Linda Vista Avenue, Napa
(off Trower Avenue)
All workshops will be 8:30 a.m. - 2:45 p.m. with breakfast and lunch provided. Workshops are free. A useful package of background materials will be sent in advance to everyone who pre-registers.
By participating in your county’s workshop, you can help to ensure that plans for the region reflect your vision of how the Bay Area should grow, and enhance the things you value in your own community. You can learn more about the workshops by going to www.transcoalition.org/smartgrowth/, or by calling ABAG at510-464-7926.
To register on-line, go to www.abag.ca.gov/planning/smartgrowth/registerworkshop.html.pa 1.0pt 0in">
ALIGN="center" ;-.25in">Smart Growth Zones:
ALIGN="center" ;-.25in">Ideas from the Coalition Annual Summit 2002: Draft for distribution at April meeting
>
>In a four of the breakout groups at the Coalition annual summit participants endorsed the concept of Smart Growth Zones (SGZ). After some discussion, participants decided on the following priorities for criteria by which the zones could be defined, and benefits that should accrue within those zones. These can be broken down into “Criteria” or what would be required to qualify as a SGZ and “Benefits” This summary hits on some of the highlights, the full summaries will soon be posted on the Coalition website at www.transcoalition.orgMsoListBullet" "none;tIn general groups started with the understanding that SGZ must
be close to transit hubs or “pedestrian villages”" " lfo8"> ; have mixed-use zoning, including significant housing" " lfo8">; plan for convenient and safe access by bicycle
Key Social Equity Issues:
" " lfo8">; SGZs must be located in a city/county with policies to encourage mixed-income housing, such as inclusionary zoning.
" " lfo8">; SGZs should support development of locally-owned businesses, either by setting aside a percent of new development that must be locally owned OR by using planning dollars to help local business owners to set up shop. The latter could be through support services such as co-op purchasing or assistance in securing access to capital.
" " lfo8">Planning in SGZs must be inclusive and bottom-up, with planning conducted not only by city/county staff but in a real partnership with local residents through community-based organizations.
SGZs must be in a city with “Just-cause eviction” or other renter protections to prevent displacement.SGZs fund should support wealth creation by local low-income residents, either by allowing them to use “sweat equity” to become homeowners, or other methods." " lfo8">SGZs should include senior housing in close proximity to BART, high-frequency bus routes, and other rapid transit.
" " lfo8">Some SGZ funds should be set aside as planning funds for community organizations; for example, this could fund community organizers to help residents learn about and participate in planning processes.
Key Urban Issues:
A smart-growth zone should have advance community feedback.
To speed the development, protect from challenges, and assure balking politicians, it could be endorsed by organizations like BATLUC and Urban Ecology or an endorsement-panel of experts.
Smart Growth on the Edge—Rural and Suburban Issues breakout report: SB 1555
http://democrats.sen.ca.gov/
SB 1555 to Ensure the Safety of Pedestrians and Bicyclists on California’s Road
Bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities represent 25% of traffic related fatalities in California.
"The safety of our roads for all who use them is of great importance to me. As a parent and a bicyclist, I have been concerned about the significant number of accidents involving pedestrians and bicyclists, and particularly children,” said Senator Torlakson. “My hope is that by increasing education about road safety for pedestrians and bicyclists, which SB 1555 will do, we can bring about safer roads for our communities," added Torlakson.
Background
600 pedestrians and 125 bicyclists are killed every year on California’s streets and roads. Thirty four percent of all cyclists killed by cars in California are under 18 years of age. Studies have shown that drivers who hit a child pedestrian were four times more likely to have a history of citations. In addition, bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities represent 25% of traffic related fatalities in California. While one quarter of all traffic fatalities in the state involve bicyclists and pedestrians, currently no portion of the funds annually received by the state for moving violation fines is applied to improving pedestrian or bicyclist safety.
Each year, obesity and inactivity cost the state government about $15 billion in lost productivity and health-related expenses. Additionally, there are 40,000 deaths in California associated with being obese or overweight. Increasing opportunities for physical activity in a community can have enormous benefits and lower health care costs. Increasing biking and walking in a metropolitan area can not only lower health care costs due to obesity, but also can improve air quality and traffic congestion.
Senate Bill 1555 will address pedestrian and bicyclist safety issues and help promote physical activity by educating parents, teachers, community leaders, and children regarding safe walking and bicycling practices, as well as safe street, sidewalk and trail design. The measure also seeks to develop and implement instructional materials and training programs to teach bicyclists to operate their bicycles as vehicles on public roadways. In addition, SB 1555 will educate motorists regarding the rights and welfare of pedestrians and bicyclists.
Senate Bill 1555 is supported by the California Bike Coalition, the Planning and Conservation League, and other local safety and bicycle advocacy groups. The measure will be heard in the Senate Public Safety Committee in April.
SB 1636
http://democrats.sen.ca.gov/servlet/gov.ca.senate.democrats.
pub.members.memDisplaySpotlightFeature?district=sd10&ID=2067
SFact Sheet for SB 1636 - Reducing Barriers to In-fill Housing
PROBLEM:
A traffic standard called "level of service" is functioning as a regulatory barrier preventing one of the main goals of smart growth advocates: in-fill development and the creation of affordable housing close to shops, services and transportation.
BACKGROUND:
Throughout California smart growth is becoming the standard for managing scarce land, providing new housing for the state’s growing population, and rebuilding our cities and suburbs. Part of smart growth’s aim to use urban land more efficiently, thereby reducing the pressure on open space while providing better transportation options for residents of urban and suburban communities. Creating new affordable housing, retail, and industry in existing areas, called "in-fill development," closer to mass transit and job sites is one of the most effective means of reducing regional traffic congestion.Yet as California begins to demand more in-fill housing some regulatory barriers prove to be overly burdensome. One of these barriers is a measure of traffic congestion known as Level of Service (LOS). LOS requires any housing or commercial development to prove that it will not have a significant impact on traffic congestion. If it does, then it cannot be built. Even though in-fill development proposals around mass transit stations reduce overall traffic demand at the city, county and regional level, these benefits are not taken into account for LOS calculations. Therefore, the existing "one size fits all" LOS standards either prohibit -- or make extremely more difficult -- the most necessary in-fill proposals from ever taking place.
SB 1636:
";0in;: tDefines an "In-fill opportunity zone" as a specific area designated by a city or county as a target for new compact residential, retail, or commercial development within one-third mile of a mass transit station in counties with a population over 400,000.
tProhibits LOS standards from applying within an in-fill opportunity zone.
;0in;: tAllows an exemption of these provision if city streets and highways are included by a city or county under an alternative area-wide LOS standard.
SPONSOR
Surface Transportation Policy Project
1.5pt; mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">
From: Dave Snyder, SFBC and Regional Bicycle Advisory Committee
To: BATLUC membership
Re: Bicycle Platform
pa 1.0pt 0in">Date: April 15, 2002
Below is a list of three initiatives that the Regional Bicycle Advocacy Committee (REBAC) is working on. I am hoping that the Coalition membership will support these initiatives and, if deemed valuable enough, to help lead the effort to obtain the necessary funding and policy changes.
1. Fund Safe Routes to Transit in the next fiscal year and the next RTP
Create a $1 million regional "Safe Routes to Transit" fund in fiscal year 2002-2003 to support regional bikeway projects that will increase ridership on transit by encouraging safe bicycling to transit stations. Develop procedures for project selection and prioritization for this program in preparation for inclusion in the next Regional Transportation Plan at the 25-year funding level of $420 million.
Safe Routes to Transit: 25-Year Estimates
lfo12; t; $60 million bicycle parking
lfo12; t $160 million (227 stations x $700,000/station)
lfo12; t; $200 million for large capital projects
2. Fund Regional Promotion & Marketing
$300,000 over two years to a regional bicycle advocacy organization. This addresses the discovery by RIDES for Bay Area Commuters that "never considered it" was a major reason why people don't bicycle commute. Also, too many people don't realize that bicycling is safer than driving per hour of exposure. No regional agency or organization currently promotes bicycling, except for RIDES for Bay Area Commuters for whom bicycling is a small part of the agenda, and therefore not seriously considered.
This would fund
(1) Professional research to reach the correct target audience with the right message. The proposed target audience is the population of bay area residents who live within five miles of work or for whom a bike-and-transit combined trip would add no more than 10 minutes to their one-way commute;
(2) Professional liason with RIDES to improve bike to work day sponsorship, to better leverage MTC's existing investment in that program; and
(3) Materials to give people the skills they need to be confident they'll be safe when they ride.
(The funding for this can probably come from the national Conserve By Bike amendment to the energy bill that was just approved by the Senate. If the amendment does not hold or if MTC doesn't get one of the $300,000 grants, we would like MTC to find the money-at least a substantial portion of the $300,000, elsewhere.)
3. Include "increase Funding for Bicycle Projects" and "Adopt Good Roads
Requirement" in MTC's federal reauthorization principles in 2003.
TEA-21 will probably be reauthorized in 2003, not this year, so MTC will have one more chance to affect the reauthorization.
1.5pt; mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">
The California Alliance for Transportation Choices, a statewide coalition of over 45 mission-based organizations has endorsed a set of principles that unite the participating groups in their efforts to improve California’s transportation system.
The principles are:
California’s traffic congestion problems are symptoms of a larger problem, a problem that includes great imbalances between jobs and housing, the lack of convenient transportation choices, as well as continued low-density sprawl development that force people to drive for virtually every trip. The state must tackle its transportation and traffic problems through a balance of strategies including the development of world-class public transit, creating more bicycle and pedestrian-friendly streets and neighborhoods, community trails and greenways, the production of new “infill” housing close to existing jobs, shops and services, and the encouragement of more compact growth and land use patterns. While roads and highways are an important part of California’s transportation network, significant investments in public transportation, bicycling, walking, paratransit, car-sharing, telecommuting, and ridesharing must become the centerpiece of the state’s 21st century transportation investment strategy. The state already has one of the lowest rates of licensed drivers in the nation, and our growing population of youth and seniors point to the need for better transportation choices for an increasingly diverse population. Californians in the future should be able to participate fully in society whether or not they own a car and regardless of age, ability or income.The state must do everything within its power to accommodate future growth within existing cities, suburbs and towns. This shift in growth patterns back towards already built-up areas will greatly reduce the burden on the state’s existing freeway systems while making public transit more feasible. More compact growth patterns will reduce the need to build, operate and maintain vast new transportation infrastructure, and allow limited taxpayer dollars to be spent on repairing aging transit systems and fixing local streets.California’s transportation decisions and policies have historically been made with very little citizen involvement or public accountability. The state’s transportation decision-making process must be democratized and opened up to those who have historically not had a seat at the table, in particular, persons with disabilities, low-income communities and people of color.: A major factor favoring low-density development is the state's fiscal structure that forces cities and counties to depend on sales taxes. This encourages excess commercial development while failing to encourage housing production, producing California’s characteristic jobs-housing imbalance and creating traffic. Until this vital area is reformed, the state's growth and development patterns will continue to be distorted.
The largest increase in traffic that’s clogging up streets and roads throughout the state isn’t the commute to work but shorter errand trips and parents driving their children to school. California has one of the highest pedestrian fatality rates in the nation and is raising a new generation of children who are more isolated and inactive than ever before. Crucial transportation strategies for the state to both reduce congestion and improve public health include providing safer walking and bicycling routes to school, rebuilding neighborhoods, towns, cities and suburbs that are more bicycle and pedestrian-friendly, and encouraging a mix of schools, shops, businesses, homes and transit stations within walking distance from one another.The state must begin using its power of the purse, specifically the provision of valuable transportation funding to regions and local governments, in order to create financial incentives for infill housing and more pedestrian-friendly mixed-use developments. Other states, like Oregon, Florida, New Jersey, and Maryland, are doing far more to intelligently focus both growth and resources towards already built up areas through a mix of political leadership, planning guidance, and financial incentives.
The state must pursue innovative market and incentive-based strategies to make it easier for people to avoid congestion. More accurate pricing signals, such as variable tolls, tax-free transit vouchers, parking cash-out programs, incentives for telecommuting, and location-efficient mortgages, will go a long way towards managing traffic demand and improving the attractiveness of alternatives to solo commuting.
|
|
