San Francisco Transportation Plan Update

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "San Francisco Transportation Plan Update"

Robert Walsh
5 years ago
Views:

1 San Francisco Transportation Plan Update Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy and SFTP Call for Projects SFTP CAC Meeting #3 April 13, 2011

discretionary money available by 2040 It s about Policy, it s about Priorities Policy How can we advance policy mandates, such as greenhouse gas reduction,

2 What is the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)? Long-range investment plan for the region Plan developed by MTC (regional 9 county Bay Area planning agency) ~$40-60 billion (expected) in federal/state/regional discretionary money available by 2040 It s about Policy, it s about Priorities Policy How can we advance policy mandates, such as greenhouse gas reduction, through funding decisions/regional initiatives? Priorities When transportation funding becomes available, what should we invest in? How can we divide the pie to best advance our sometimes competing goals? E.g. expansion vs. maintenance SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 2

New SCS context: addressing climate change/ affordable housing through RTP SB 375, landmark legislation for California on land use, transportation and environmental planning passed in 2008 Requires

3 New SCS context: addressing climate change/ affordable housing through RTP SB 375, landmark legislation for California on land use, transportation and environmental planning passed in 2008 Requires each region to add a new element to its RTP called a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) which must: Housing Units Planed in San Francisco Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from driving in the Bay Area by 15% per capita by Identify a strategy to house the region s population at all income levels Source: SF Planning Dept. SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 3

4 What is the RTP/SCS Call for Projects? MTC issued a call for RTP/SCS projects on February 14 Authority, as San Francisco s Congestion Management Agency (CMA), is responsible for: Issuing a call for projects Performing related outreach to project sponsors and the public Prioritizing projects to fit in San Francisco s target of discretionary funds ($6.16 billion) by April 29 Coordinating with MTC, project sponsors, and stakeholders, in policy discussions leading to development of final list of San Francisco projects in RTP/SCS Regional transit operators and Caltrans submit projects directly to MTC Public can submit projects but need agency sponsor SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 4

5 What San Francisco projects were in the last RTP (T2035)? Individual projects such as BRT on Van Ness, Geary, and Geneva corridors Presidio Parkway Central Subway Caltrain Electrification Improve the Great Highway Programmatic categories such as Traffic calming Bicycle facilities Transit priority treatments Transit rehabilitation Local streets and roads maintenance SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 5 5

6 How does the RTP relate to the SFTP? Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy Climate NewAction ideas start Plan here SF Transportation Plan Neighborhood Plans & Projects Modal Plans: Bicycle Plan, Transit Effectiveness Project, Better Streets Plan Hayes 2-way Conversion Traffic Calming Projects Parklets Bicycle lanes Pedestrian improvements Curb extensions Transit Signal Priority General Plan Transportation Element Major Projects & Plans Van Ness BRT Geary BRT Caltrain Electrification/DTX SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 6

Public Outreach to solicit project ideas and priorities Emails to over

org/rtp in English, Spanish, and Chinese with FAQs, online submittal form

communities of concern March/April Authority committee meetings to serve as

7 Public Outreach to solicit project ideas and priorities s to over 2,000 individuals Newspaper ads Web page in English, Spanish, and Chinese with FAQs, online submittal form Neighborhood Meetings: 200+ individuals reached at 14 meetings, targeted in communities of concern March/April Authority committee meetings to serve as public hearings for project ideas and project priorities SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 7

traffic calming High demand for expansion of transit w/ designated right-of-way Demand for

8 What we heard from members of the public 200+ ideas were submitted by March 24 deadline Support for projects already being pursued High demand for transit, pedestrian, cycling, traffic calming High demand for expansion of transit w/ designated right-of-way Demand for roadway capacity reduction projects (eg remove lanes) SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 8

What we heard from public agencies Separate process for public agencies to submit projects for consideration Almost 100 ideas submitted by deadline Projects already in current RTP New projects coming

9 What we heard from public agencies Separate process for public agencies to submit projects for consideration Almost 100 ideas submitted by deadline Projects already in current RTP New projects coming from new planning efforts since last RTP TEP, Development Plans at BVHP, Mission Bay, Treasure Island, Eastern Neighborhoods, Park Merced, Bi-County Many projects that can be bundled into programmatic categories SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 9

10 SFCTA Project Screening Category Main Criteria 1. Consider for inclusion in 2013 RTP/SCS Consistent with SCS/RTP goals Regionally significant Seeking Plan federal/state funding or action by 2017 status Eligible for programmatic category (doesn t impact capacity) 2. Consider for the SFTP Ideas 3. Not under consideration Inconsistent Not Not needing further development/ vetting typically included in RTP but relevant for SF w/ City policy related to transportation SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 10

1. Sample Individual Projects Under Consideration for Inclusion in RTP/SCS Projects Already in Current RTP Geary, Van Ness, and Geneva/Harney BRT Muni light rail vehicle acquisition

11 1. Sample Individual Projects Under Consideration for Inclusion in RTP/SCS Projects Already in Current RTP Geary, Van Ness, and Geneva/Harney BRT Muni light rail vehicle acquisition Presidio Parkway Central Subway Transbay Transit Center and Caltrain Downtown Extension 22-Fillmore Trolley Coach Extension to Mission Bay SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 11

1. Sample New Individual Projects Under Consideration for Inclusion in RTP/SCS Proposed New Projects: Better Market Street* Transit Effectiveness Project (TEP)* ENTRIPS Circulation Improvements*

12 1. Sample New Individual Projects Under Consideration for Inclusion in RTP/SCS Proposed New Projects: Better Market Street* Transit Effectiveness Project (TEP)* ENTRIPS Circulation Improvements* Downtown SF Congestion Pricing Pilot HOV lanes on US 101 Oakdale Caltrain Station* Muni fleet/facilities expansion e.g. BRT Maintenance Facility Mission Bay Loop *Indicates a project that was also submitted by the public SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 12

13 1. Sample Projects Eligible for Programmatic Funding Pedestrian Wider Sidewalks Longer/New Ped. Countdown Signals Bicycle Bike Racks Bikeways Transit Bus Shelters Transit Priority Treatments Multi-Modal Safe Routes to School Education/Outreach Electric Vehicle Infrastructure SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 13

2. Ideas Not Being Considered for RTP/SCS, But Will Be

I-280 at San Jose/ Monterrey/ Guerrero Road Diet, Balboa

Longer-Term Transit Expansion BRT Network Light-Rail and

14 2. Ideas Not Being Considered for RTP/SCS, But Will Be Considered for SFTP Longer-Term Roadway Changes On/Off-Ramp Changes, e.g. I-280 at San Jose/ Monterrey/ Guerrero Road Diet, Balboa Park, Hairball reconfiguration HOV lanes on I-280 Longer-Term Transit Expansion BRT Network Light-Rail and Subway Network Transit Policy Changes Make Muni Free (for low income/students, for everyone) Local service changes (Muni + BART) SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 14

15 3. Sample Projects Not Under Consideration Build more parking garages Eliminate bike racks on buses and disability access on Limited Bus Lines Underground the electrical wires on Cesar Chavez Daylight Islais Creek SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 15

16 RTP and SFTP Call for Projects Schedule and Next Steps Call for projects released February 18 Public meetings on Call for Projects March 22: SFCTA Plans and Programs Committee and public outreach March 23: SFCTA Citizens Advisory Committee Deadline for project submittal to Authority March 24 April 13: SFTP Community Advisory Committee Public meetings on San Francisco project priorities April 27: SFCTA Citizens Advisory Committee Authority submits draft and final San Francisco project priorities to MTC April/May 2011 MTC project performance evaluation May-July 2011 Second call for SFTP projects Spring/Summer 2011 Discussion on RTP investment priorities Fall 2011/Winter 2012 May 17: SFCTA Plans and Programs Committee SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 16

17 RTP and SFTP Call for Projects Schedule and Next Steps Call for projects released February 18 Public meetings Call for Projects Critical PolicyonPoints March 22: SFCTA Plans and Programs Committee and public March 23: SFCTA Citizens Advisory Committee 1. outreach Will have to revisit priorities after performance evaluation, leading to leaner constrained list Deadline forfinancially project submittal to Authority March Opportunity to increase SF s share of the regional funding pie, through April 13: SFTP Community Advisory Committee investment policy that takes into account: Public meetings April 27: SFCTA Citizens Advisory Committee on Travel demand San Francisco project priorities May 17: SFCTA Plans and Programs Committee Growth/affordable housing Authority submits draft and final San April/May 2011 Performance Francisco project priorities to MTC 3. Opportunity to advocate to grow the pie, seek new revenue sources MTC project performance evaluation May-July 2011 Second call for SFTP projects Spring/Summer 2011 Discussion on RTP investment priorities Fall 2011/Winter 2012 SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 17

18 Call for Projects will inform development of RTP/SCS Alternative Scenarios Initial Vision Scenario December 2010-April 2011 RTP Call for Projects Feeds into Alternative Scenarios Alternative Scenarios April 2011-February 2012 Preferred RTP/SCS Scenario Selected: February 2012 Environmental review: February 2012-March 2013 RTP/SCS Adoption: April 2013 April MTC/ABAG will present IVS findings and seek input from San Francisco April 19, 10:30 AM, City Hall Room 263 MTC/ABAG presentation Plans & Programs Committee, April 25, 5:30-8:30pm Milton Marks Conference Center, 455 Golden Gate Ave. MTC/ABAG-hosted SF Public Workshop SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 18

19 Economic Competitiveness Aspirational Scenario, Initial Results: What would it take to keep the average commute times to San Francisco from increasing? April 13, 2011

20 Scenario framework (1) Select optimization metric or measure (2) Determine the target for the optimization metric (ie, What would it take to? ) (3) Isolate the most underperforming markets or corridors (ie, those that contribute most to target failure ) (4) Compile list of projects to address these and other underperforming markets/corridors 20

Time for Workers for Regional Work Centers, 2010 Note: chart

21 San Francisco Downtown is currently most competitive average auto-to-transit commute times ec nat si D/ e m it Average Commute Time for Workers for Regional Work Centers, 2010 Note: chart depicts workers to given workplace destinations Source: SF CHAMP 4.1, draft p

22 In the baseline, San Francisco begins losing its travel-time competitiveness, especially transit travel times Average TRANSIT Commute Time for Workers by Workplace San Francisco & Region, % SF Downtown C3 SF Southeast tra ns i t 2010 Downtown Oakland Downtown San Jose tra ns i t

23 Getting to an aspirational goal with >71,000 new households and >154,000 new jobs Focused on transportation effects: travel time SF auto times increase, particularly outside of greater downtown SF transit is most competitive today, but losing ground over time Expect 5% increase in average total commute times to San Francisco Expect 6% increase in average transit commute times to San Francisco What would it take to keep the total average commute time to San Francisco from increasing? 23

24 Notably underperforming markets and corridors highest travel time increases in key markets to SF San Francisco eastern areas: greater downtown, southeast San Pablo and Central/East Contra Costa Co. Northwest Alameda Co. (Berkeley/Piedmont/Oakland) Southern Alameda Co. (Hayward/Fremont) Central and NW Santa Clara Co. (San Jose/Mountain View) 24

25 3 levels of investment Regional Project BART freq (2mins in tube) Low Med High BART new tube Bay Bridge Contraflow Lane Caltrain 2025 (includes electrification) Caltrain Downtown Extension High Speed Rail (4 trains/hr, no Baby Bullet) TPS: Evans, Palou, HPX, CPX HOV/HOT on 280/101 (includes transit service re-route) Congestion Pricing (NEC) 25

26 3 levels of investment San Francisco Project Low Med High BRT: San Bruno/Potrero, Geneva/Harney, Mission, Market, Fulton, California, Downtown TPS: Evans, Palou, HPX, CPX Transit Extensions: 14 to Daly City; 23, 28, 24, 48 to Bayview Hunters Point Transit Extensions: M-line to Daly City Roadway Extensions: Geneva Signalize key rapid transit streets, eg: Lincoln, Haight, Judah, Church Muni Frequency improvements, eg: 71L, 22, 47, 19, 48 Fleet upgrades, eg: 22, 19, 6, T-short, M to Park Merced Grade separations at key rail-line hotspots, eg: Church/Duboce, St Francis/West Portal Congestion Pricing (NEC and 280/101 HOT ) New rail connection between UCSF & Mission Bay 26

27 Performance of the scenarios base 2035EconLow 2035EconMed 2035EconHigh Auto Transit $2,000 $5,000 $20,000 high medium low Total Average commute time (minutes) Cost (millions of $) Cost Effectiveness 27

28 Observations Aspirational travel time goal seems achievable at a cost of ~$2 5B Projects focused on transit and auto; few projects for cyclists or pedestrians Travel time may not be the best/sole rationale for big ticket projects Need to refine and identify corridors with best/worst performance SF's success depends partially on regional actions & coordination Transit oriented development, access to regional transit, pricing & parking management Next steps will help to identify top projects for the constrained scenarios Identify crowding hot spots (routes and parking access) Quantify costs of crowding Scenario test: regional pricing Tradeoffs & performance within other goal areas 28

29 Livability Scenario Aspirational Goal Framework What would it take to make the City s Transit First mode share higher than 50%? April 13, 2011

30 Why focus on mode share? Mode share is a good transportation indicator of livability It s correlated with many key aspects of livability (traffic incidents, traffic intrusion, noise, air and water pollution) It s easy to grasp It can be affected directly and measurably by the SFTP 30

31 What s the problem? San Francisco is a Transit First city but Transit First would continue to be a minority of trips Baseline Mode Share, 2035 Daily Walk & Bike 22% Transit 19% Carpool 22% Drive alone 37% 31

32 Our aspirational scenario for livability What would it take to make San Francisco s Transit First mode share higher than 50%? Transit First includes transit, walking and biking For all daily trips to, from and within San Francisco 32

33 We ll consider projects that increase the transit mode share Transit projects that: Improve reliability Decrease travel times Reduce the need to transfer Improve access Increase security 33

support the City s Pedestrian Safety goals, we will: Analyze collision trends

34 that increase the walk mode share Street closures Road diets Traffic calming Other safety/security improvements Streetscaping and open space treatments To support the City s Pedestrian Safety goals, we will: Analyze collision trends Analyze collision factors and gather input Suggest projects and program delivery measures 34

the city Secure bicycle parking Need to support the City s official 20 by 20

35 that increase the bike mode share Network of cycletracks (lanes physically separated from cars) Bike stations at key transit hubs Bike sharing throughout the city Secure bicycle parking Need to support the City s official 20 by 20 goal for bicycling through: Increased connectivity Improved education and awareness 35

that reduce auto travel demand To promote school transportation alternatives, we will ask: What would it take to let your 4th grader walk or bike to school?

36 that reduce auto travel demand To promote school transportation alternatives, we will ask: What would it take to let your 4th grader walk or bike to school? What would it take to let your 7th grader take transit to school? Enhanced commuter benefits, employee parking cashout Safe Routes to School, school pools Transit passes for new developments, car sharing More use of shuttles, vanpools, jitneys Variable on-street parking pricing Relaxed off-street parking requirements Plus sensitivity test on supportive land uses 36

37 Thank You! Next Meeting: mid/late June April 13, 2011

Central Freeway and Octavia Circulation Study

Central Freeway and Octavia Circulation Study Final Report Plans and Programs Committee San Francisco County Transportation Authority September 18, 2012 Presentation Outline Background and Study Purpose