|
MTC Calculates That Transit, With Infill, Beats Highways and Sprawl
In 1993-4 the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) developed a new Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP). The Regional Alliance For Transit (RAFT), a coalition of
transit and environmental activists, prepared a transit -land use alternative RTP for MTC
to analyze with its own, conservative, modeling system. The results of that analysis are
very instructive.
RAFT's alternative would have eliminated nearly all of the 500 miles of new freeway
lanes around the region. Instead, it would have used the same total capital funding for
transit, including electrifying the CalTrain from San Jose to San Francisco, extending it
past its present San Francisco terminus a mile and a half to the downtown Transbay
Terminal, and operating it on BART schedules. Having improved CalTrain service to San
Francisco Airport, RAFT would have eliminated the BART extension past Colma.
RAFT would have built light rail: Muni Metro on Third Street in San Francisco and in
the Capitol and Tasman corridors in Santa Clara county. RAFT would have expanded heavy
rail on existing tracks to link Santa Clara light rail and CalTrain to BART and on to
Livermore, Sacramento and San Joaquin county. RAFT would have operated electric
trolley-bus service in the urban corridor between Hayward, Oakland and Richmond on East
14th St. and San Pablo Ave., operated express buses on I-80 and I-680, and commuter rail
in Marin and Sonoma counties. It would have converted some freeway lanes to carpool lanes.
RAFT prescribed parking cash-out, whereby non-driving employees would receive the cash
value of their unused "free" parking space--an idea included in Clinton's 1995
budget proposal. California counties have the authority to implement this proposal under
Assemblyman Katz's 1992 law, AB 2109. County congestion management agencies can require
employers to offer parking cash-out to all employees getting free or subsidized parking.
CMAs can reduce employers'costs by reducing the parking spaces they are otherwise required
to provide.
Further, RAFT used the same ABAG regional population and job projections as MTC, but
clustered the growth around transit stations--in city centers with urban services,
avoiding the huge cost of building infrastructure on raw land. ABAG's land use policy
framework and the Air District's model air quality element for cities specify just such
development. RAFT saved some 200 square miles of forests, grasslands and farmlands that
MTC's plan would have developed for residences, commerce, industry and local streets,
mostly in eastern Alameda, Contra Costa and Solano counties, southern Santa Clara county
and northern Sonoma and Napa counties. The roads, water, sewer, gas, electric, schools,
fire stations and other infrastructure to develop that land would cost some $25 billion.
RAFT would have saved most of that cost by directing development into already served
areas.
MTC's analysis predicted that by 2010 RAFT's alternative would have held vehicular
travel 6% below MTC's alternative, saving the average family 1,148 miles of travel
annually, worth $379. RAFT would have saved 350,000 gallons of fuel daily.
RAFT's alternative would have reduced pollutant emissions 1.8 tons/day of organics, 2.8
tons/day of NOx, 19 tons/day of CO, and 3.3 tons/day of particulates.
RAFT would have cut 326,000 vehicle-hours of travel--congestion--daily, or 13%.
Further, RAFT would have boosted transit passengers regionwide by 24% over MTC's
alternative, boosted Muni Metro 29%, CalTrain 167%, Santa Clara light rail 76%, East Bay
heavy rail 152%, BART 15% and AC Transit 39%.
Advantages of the RAFT RTP over MTC's Adopted RTP:
Travel
- Vehicle Miles of Travel 6% less
- Annual automobile cost $379 saving per household
- Vehicle hours of travel (congestion) 13% less
- Fuel consumption 9% savings
Emissions:
- Carbon monoxide 6,900 tons in annual reductions
- Reactive organic gases 660 tons in annual reductions
- Nitrogen oxide 1020 tons in annual reductions
- Particulates (PM10) 1200 tons in annual reductions
Development:
- Regional population and job growth No difference
- Rural and natural land urbanized 200 sq. miles saved
- Infrastructure costs for new development Up to $25 billion saved
RAFT 2010 Transit Additions
SF: MUNI Metro Bayshore LRT Line
SF-SC: CalTrain electrification and extension to Transbay Terminal, with BART schedules
and local & express service
SM: SFO People Mover, with CalTrain/BART transfer station, and express bus to Colma
BART
SC: Capitol Ave/Exp and Tasman LRTs, with Great America transfer station
SC-Sol: Expanded Capitol Corridor service, with Shinn St and Benecia transfer stations
SC-CC: Expanded San Joaquin service Tamien-Livermore commuter rail, with Shinn St
(Fremont) transfer station to BART
Al Trolley buses on San Pablo (from Richmond), E 14 St, Telegraph Av, College Av,
MacArthur Av & Foothill Bl, with traffic light preemption, express & local service
SF-Sol I-80 Vallejo-SF express bus service
CC-Sol I-680 Vallejo-Pleasanton express bus service
CC-Ala I-680 Martinez-Pleasanton express bus service
Marin-Sonoma NWP Larkspur-Sonoma commuter rail
Region 19 miles of freeway lanes, compared to MTC's 500.
Daily Transit Riders (1000)
| |
1990 |
2010 |
|
RAFT/ |
| |
|
MTC |
RAFT |
MTC |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Muni |
756 |
788 |
807 |
1.02 |
| Metro, F, Cable |
173 |
227 |
293 |
1.29 |
| CalTrain |
24 |
32 |
84 |
2.67 |
| SamTrans |
74 |
73 |
101 |
1.39 |
| Santa Clara Transit |
111 |
142 |
224 |
1.58 |
| Light Rail |
12 |
35 |
61 |
1.76 |
| AMTRAK: SC-Ala + |
0 |
11 |
27 |
2.52 |
| AC Transit |
222 |
232 |
321 |
1.39 |
| BART |
250 |
384 |
443 |
1.15 |
| Golden Gate Transit |
47 |
54 |
72 |
1.34 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Regional Total |
1,576 |
1,858 |
2,311 |
1.24 |
| |
|
|
|
|
Households, Employment and Open Space Saved
in 2010 |
| Households (1000) |
Employment (1000) |
| MTC Superdistrict |
1990 |
2010 |
1990 |
2010 |
OS Saved by RAFT (sq mi) |
| |
|
ABAG |
RAFT |
|
ABAG |
RAFT |
| Downtown SF |
58 |
73 |
73 |
391 |
438 |
488 |
0 |
| Richmond Dist |
96 |
99 |
99 |
80 |
86 |
86 |
0 |
| Mission Dist |
104 |
112 |
133 |
92 |
134 |
134 |
-0.3 |
| Sunset Dist |
47 |
47 |
47 |
22 |
26 |
26 |
0 |
| Daly City/ San Bruno |
92 |
99 |
119 |
132 |
157 |
162 |
-0.06 |
| San Mateo/Burling |
76 |
91 |
111 |
95 |
117 |
125 |
2.6 |
| Redwood C/MenloPk |
73 |
86 |
106 |
93 |
120 |
135 |
4.0 |
| Palo Alto/Los Alto |
66 |
73 |
90 |
125 |
133 |
145 |
0.8 |
| Sunnyvale/Mtn. V. |
80 |
102 |
117 |
335 |
395 |
407 |
0.1 |
| Cupertino/Sarato |
112 |
122 |
122 |
125 |
147 |
147 |
0.6 |
| Central SJ |
87 |
107 |
128 |
139 |
173 |
238 |
-0.4 |
| Milpitas/E SJ |
87 |
105 |
105 |
32 |
121 |
121 |
1.5 |
| South SJ |
64 |
77 |
68 |
35 |
58 |
45 |
3.1 |
| Gilroy/Morgan Hil |
24 |
48 |
26 |
23 |
79 |
25 |
11.9 |
| Livermore/Pleasan |
48 |
90 |
70 |
71 |
155 |
116 |
12.8 |
| Fremont/Union Cit |
88 |
108 |
108 |
92 |
147 |
145 |
1.9 |
| Hayward/San Lean |
113 |
113 |
142 |
138 |
163 |
178 |
1.6 |
| Oakland/Alameda |
165 |
178 |
193 |
231 |
261 |
305 |
0.2 |
| Berkeley/Albany |
66 |
72 |
75 |
89 |
105 |
116 |
0 |
| Richmond/El Cerri |
80 |
98 |
103 |
66 |
90 |
97 |
4.2 |
| Concord/Martinez |
76 |
99 |
103 |
93 |
125 |
127 |
4.1 |
| Walnut Creek |
56 |
63 |
64 |
71 |
80 |
84 |
3.0 |
| Danville/San Ramo |
32 |
46 |
39 |
40 |
65 |
57 |
6.9 |
| Antioch/Pittsburg |
56 |
106 |
76 |
31 |
78 |
51 |
11.5 |
| Vallejo/Benicia |
48 |
63 |
63 |
53 |
80 |
|
5.4 |
| Fairfield/Vacavil |
66 |
120 |
78 |
67 |
132 |
74 |
24.7 |
| Napa |
28 |
38 |
33 |
30 |
52 |
33 |
5.7 |
| St Helena |
13 |
17 |
14 |
19 |
25 |
19 |
1.6 |
| Petaluma/Rohnert Park |
53 |
74 |
57 |
41 |
77 |
60 |
13.0 |
| Santa Rosa/Sebastopol |
72 |
98 |
98 |
94 |
142 |
150 |
17.2 |
| Healdsburg/Clovrdale |
24 |
41 |
30 |
18 |
34 |
20 |
8.7 |
| Novato |
21 |
28 |
28 |
19 |
36 |
25 |
3.1 |
| San Rafael |
40 |
48 |
48 |
51 |
62 |
72 |
0.9 |
| Mill Valley/Saus |
34 |
38 |
38 |
32 |
37 |
37 |
1.3 |
| Regional total |
2,246 |
2,802 |
2,802 |
3,113 |
4,128 |
4,128 |
151.3 |
| streets and roads 50 |
Total 200 |
Up to Top | Printer-friendly version of this page |
