1 Round One Public Outreach Workshops Fall 2005 Presented to: Women’s Transportation Seminar 2007 Annual Conference May 2, 2007 Presented by: Therese McMillan Deputy Executive Director, Policy Metropolitan Transportation Commission

2 Regional Measure 2 Approved by voters in March 2004 Increased bridge toll by $1, raising $125 million annually Allocated total of $4.5 million for Regional Rail Plan

3 Bay Area population will grow to 10 million people by 2050, a 48% increase from 2000 Sacramento will grow by 132% San Joaquin will grow by 201% Need for Regional Rail: Population Boom

4 Need for Regional Rail: Increased Travel 1.Transbay: San Francisco to Oakland (+204,000 trips) 2.Peninsula: San Mateo Co. to Santa Clara Co. (+156,000 trips) 3.East Bay: Alameda Co. to Santa Clara Co. (+152,000 trips) 4.I-680: Alameda Co. to NW Contra Costa Co. (+141,000 trips) 5.I-680: Alameda Co. to Contra Costa Co. East (+104,000 trips) Fastest Growing Corridors by 2030

5 1.Solano: 498% 2.Alameda: 267% 3.Napa: 223% 4.San Francisco: 189% 5.Santa Clara: 133% Counties with Highest Increase in Vehicle Hours of Delay by 2030 Need for Regional Rail: Persistent Congestion

6 Trucks currently carry largest share of Bay Area domestic trade (80%), followed by rail (6%) By 2050, freight traffic will grow in excess of 350% Need for Regional Rail: Increased Freight Traffic

7 Lack of action to address Bay Area transportation woes threatens our economic vitality and environmental quality Need for Regional Rail: High Cost to Economy & Environment

8 To create a safe, fast, reliable and integrated passenger and freight rail network To establish a consistent framework for regional rail investment decisions To sustain and enhance economic vitality of Northern California, while minimizing environmental impacts and providing excellent transit service to downtowns and economic centers Study Purpose

9 Planning Process – A Team Effort Study Partners –MTC, BART, Caltrain, & CHSRA Regional Rail Steering Committee –Passenger and freight railroad operators, county congestion management agencies & other local partners –Neighboring regional agencies Advisory Group Community

10 Rail Plan Step-by-Step Phase 1 – Vision –Define rail vision, purpose and need, and brainstorm on key issues and conceptual system alternatives Phase 2 – Technical Analysis –Refine study alternatives and perform technical analysis Phase 3 – Draft/Final Plan –Examine support strategies, make study findings, and prepare draft plan identifying regional and high- speed rail extensions and services for near-, mid-, and long-terms

11 Key Study Issues BART Focus on Core Capacity by simplifying operations plan and increasing system throughput Extend in corridors where BART-type technology could potentially address regional trip needs Serve as Mass Transit system with infill stations, possible skip- stop and/or express trackage

12 Key Study Issues Railroad Services Develop separate regional passenger rail network to ultimately provide 115 mph service with lightweight equipment operating throughout the region Coordinate existing passenger services shared with freight rail (railroad companies interest?) Establish hybrid system corridor- by-corridor using the most appropriate technologies and rights of way (also consider speed and FRA or UIC Compatibility)

13 Key Study Issues High-Speed Rail Approach from the South through San Jose; links are added for service to San Francisco and Oakland? Approach from the East via the Tri-Valley area (Livermore / Pleasanton); links are added to connect to San Jose, Oakland and San Francisco? Expand regional passenger services to serve regional markets assuming no high-speed rail?

14 Improve existing freight operations practices (wherein freight movements are dispatched by the railroads) to accommodate traffic growth Optimize freight dispatching to fully utilize rail infrastructure and future improvements Consolidate select regional rail lines and improve under public ownership with centralized dispatching; and develop freight by-pass routes to route goods traffic away from city centers Key Study Issues Freight

15 Key Study Issues Governance Potential Benefits Improve customer service and experience, and streamline administration and overhead Economies of scale through shared facilities, procurement and contracting, regional coordination, and railroad negotiations Centralized operations dispatch for service coordination and incident response Single entity to conduct all negotiations with the freight railroads. Potential Risks Less autonomy; reduced local authority Loss of accountability, whether perceived or real Potential for higher labor costs

16 Phase 1 - Vision Key Public Comments Heard Connectivity between modes is critical Resolve freight and passenger rail conflicts Allow freight on high-speed rail Need new Bay crossing for rail Preserve & purchase rights-of-way Explore advanced rail technologies “One System, One Ticket” Must foster supportive land uses Must minimize impacts on low-income areas Must have safe and secure rail system

17 Phase 2 Technical Analysis (in progress)

18 Base Network MTC Resolution 3434 rail extensions: 1.BART/Oakland Airport Connector 2.BART/East Contra Costa Rail (eBART) 3.BART/Fremont-Warm Springs Extension 4.BART/Warm Springs-San Jose 5.MUNI/Third Street Corridor & Central Subway 6.Caltrain/Downtown San Francisco Extension & Transbay Transit Center 7.VTA/Downtown-East Valley 8.Sonoma-Marin Rail (SMART) 9.Dumbarton Bridge Rail Svc.

19 Base Network Adopted rail projects from neighboring regions

20 12 Study Alternatives 3 – Regional Rail without High-Speed Rail Alternatives 9 – Regional Rail with High-Speed Rail Alternatives 3 options entering from the South via San Jose 6 options entering from the East via Tri Valley

21 Refinements to Alternatives Narrowed 3 Regional Rail without HSR alternatives down to 2 –Alternatives represent most promising stations, alignments and service options for BART, regional rail, and freight-by pass options Awaiting CHSRA to identify most promising HSR stations and alignments –Bay Area to Central Valley EIR/EIS underway

22 Project Schedule Highlights Technical Analysis In progress: Ridership Forecasts, Engineering Feasibility, Capital/Operating Costs, Environmental Screening Spring 2007 Draft Plan ReleaseSummer 2007 Agency/Public OutreachLate Summer 2007 MTC Final Plan AdoptionFall 2007

23 Therese McMillan Deputy Executive Director, Policy Metropolitan Transportation Commission