Category: Public Transit

ICF Webinar on Public Transportation Performance Measures

comments Comments (0)
By Lauren Michele, September 12, 2011

ICF International

Attend: Public Transportation Performance Measures Webinar

Join ICF for a webinar that highlights the results of a report on current and best practices in the use of public transportation performance measures by state departments of transportation (DOTs) recently completed by ICF for the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP).

Drawing on results from a nationwide survey of state DOTs and interviews with staff at state DOT public transportation divisions, this report presents findings on the types of public transportation performance measures being used by state DOTs and how public transportation performance measures are being applied, as well as motivations for using performance measures and challenges faced in linking public transportation performance measures to investment decisions.

This is the second webinar in an ICF series on Performance Measures. Learn more.
EVENT DETAILS
Date: September 14, 2011
Time: 12:00 – 1:00 p.m. EDT
Location: Online
Register Now

 

 

Presenters
Michael Grant
Principal—Transportation
ICF International
Stephanie Trainor
Transportation Planner
ICF International

 

Ask Us How…

Metropolitan planning organizations and transportation agencies are using performance measures to promote sustainability in transportation decision making. Learn the details in this webinar.

Transportation Planning for Operations Webinar Series

The National Transportation Operations Coalition is hosting a webinar series on special topics in transportation planning for operations. Watch the first webinar, moderated by ICF International, on “Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning.“


 

categories Education/Webinars, Public Transit

July 3 Update: CA 2011-12 Legislative Session Overview

comments Comments (0)
By Lauren Michele, July 5, 2011

Policy in Motion is tracking a handful of bills introduced this session pertaining to the integration of land use, transportation, housing affordability, and health within the context of sustainable community development in California. Below are summaries and links to legislative analyses for 21 relevant bills:

2011 Legislative Summaries—Updated July 3, 2011

AB 147 (Dickinson)—Subdivision Map Act

  • Expands the existing eligible uses for transportation mitigation impact fees to transit, bike and pedestrian facilities.

 

AB 343 (Atkins) — Community Redevelopment Act

  • Redevelopment Plans and subsequent projects to be in alignment with climate, air quality and energy conservation goals of Chapter 728 of the Statutes of 2008.

 

AB 345 (Atkins) – Caltrans to consult with bike/pedestrian reps on traffic control devices.

  • Caltrans to convene an advisory committee of representatives from groups representing bicycle and pedestrian users of streets, roads and highways and consult with this group regarding the installation of traffic control barriers and/or devices.

 

AB 441 (Monning)–Health issues included in transportation plans.

  • Requires the California Transportation Commission to include health issues in regional transportation plans. The Office of Planning and Research would develop guidelines for local government and regional agencies to incorporate health (improvement) issues into general plans.

 

AB 539 (Williams) – Safe Routes to School speed limits.

AB 605 (Dickinson) – OPR to set standards for VMT reductions and CEQA exemptions.

  • A project could be exempt from CEQA analysis of transportation element if project met percentage reduction in vehicle trip miles.

 

AB 650 (Blumenfield) – Blue Ribbon Task Force on Public Transportation for the 21st Century

  • Requires task force to be comprised of twelve transportation subject matter experts to prepare a written report which would include findings and recommendations regarding the current state of CA’s transit system, costs of creating the needed system, and potential funding sources.

 

AB 676 (Torres)–Expands use of transportation funds.

  • Existing transportation expenditures are currently legally obligated for transportation related administration, operation, maintenance, local assistance, safety and rehabilitation projects. This bill would allocate remaining funds for the study of, and development and implementation of,capital improvement projects to be programmed in the state transportation improvement program.

 

AB 710 (Skinner) –Infill Development and Sustainable Community Act of 2011.

  • Eliminates minimum parking requirements for infill and transit-oriented development. Prohibits city or county from requiring more than one parking space per residential unit and prohibits requirement of more than one parking space per 1,000 sq. ft of commercial units for residential or mixed-use project in a transit intensive area. Also modifies definition of sustainable communities to include communities that incentivize infill development.

 

AB 819 (Wieckowski) –Enhance bicycle safety, complete streets.

  • This bill augments existing Dept. of Transportation responsibility for safety guidelines to include class IV bikeways, in addition to class I, II and III bikeways. The bill defines class IV bikeways as: “segregated bike lanes,” which provide a completely separated right-of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycles on streets and are demarcated by either a physical barrier or by distinct paint markings, or both, to minimize or prevent travel by motor vehicles.

 

AB 931 (Dickinson) –CEQA exemption rule for infill housing modification.

  • CEQA requirements are exempted for infill development if certain criteria are met. This bill would extend the current criteria for the preparation of a community-level environmental review from 5 to 20 years. It would also lower the density requirement for exemption from 20 to 15 units per acre.

 

AB 995 (Cedillo) – OPR report to legislatureon expediting Transit Oriented Development environmental review.

  • This bill would require the Office of Planning and Research, not later than July 1, 2012, to prepare and submit to the Legislature a report containing recommendations for expedited environmental review for transit-oriented development.

 

AB 1285 (Fuentes) — Regional greenhouse gas emission reduction program.

 

  • Legislation to create community greenhouse gas emission reduction program. Would provide state oversight over local government and nonprofit investments relating to greenhouse gasses.

 

SB 77 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) — Elimination of state redevelopment agencies.

  • Elimination of state redevelopment agencies (RDAs) and an orderly “wind down” of their responsibilities and assets. Local Govt successor agencies would be created to maintain certain existing RDA obligations. Elimination of state RDA’s has been identified as a method to balance the state’s budget. Property taxes that formerly went to RDAs would be directed to schools and public safety operations. The bill will result in $1.7 billion in additional funding for the 2011-2012 budget.

 

 

SB 132 (Lowenthal) — School sittings to reflect state planning priorities.

  • This bill would require the State Allocation Board to revise guidelines, rules, regulations, procedures, and policiesfor the acquisition of schoolsites and the construction of school facilities to reflect the state planning. This bill would also require that advice, standards, surveys, or information regarding the acquisition of school sites or the construction of school facilities provided by the StateDepartment of Education pursuant to this requirement reflect the state planning priorities.

 

SB 214 (Wolk) – Eliminate voter approval requirement for infrastructure finance districts.

  • This bill would eliminate the requirement of voter approval to create and authorize an infrastructure financing district. This bill would authorize a legislative body to create an infrastructure finance district, adopt an infrastructure financing plan, and issue bonds by resolutions by resolution, not requiring voter approval.

 

SB 310 (Hancock).–.Creation of the Transit Priority Project Program.

  • This bill would eliminate the requirement of voter approval for the creation of an infrastructure financing district and would authorize the appropriate legislative body to create the district, adopt the plan, and issue the bonds by resolutions. This bill would also create a streamlined permit process for development that met certain criteria and it would create a program to reimburse developer fees if a project was located within an Infrastructure Finance District.

 

SB 450 (Lowenthal) – Redevelopment agencies housing expenditures.

  • This bill reforms how redevelopment agencies spend their Low &Moderate Income Housing Funds.

 

SB 468 (Kehoe).–.An act to add Section 103 to the Streets and Highways Code, relating to transportation.

  • This bill would impose additional requirements on the departmentwith respect to proposed capacity-increasing state highway projects in the coastal zone, including requiring the department to collaborate with local agencies, the California Coastal Commission, and countywide or regional transportation planning agencies to develop traffic congestion reduction goals.

 

SB 535 (De Leon) — California Communities Healthy Air Revitalization Trust.

  • This bill would require a minimum of 10% of revenues generated from fees collected by the Air Resources Board from sources of greenhouse gas emissions would be deposited into a trust operated by the CA Treasury Dept. Funds would be in used in communities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or to mitigate health or environmental impacts of climate change.

 

SB 907 (Evans and Perez)–.Master Plan for Infrastructure Financing and Development Commission

  • This bill would create the Master Plan for Infrastructure Financing and Development Commission, consisting of specified members, and would require the commission to prepare and submit a strategy and plan for infrastructure development in California that meets certain criteria to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 2013..

 

categories California Policy, Public Transit, Transportation Funding

June 5 Update: CA 2011-12 Legislative Session Overview

comments Comments (1)
By Lauren Michele, June 6, 2011

Policy in Motion is tracking a handful of bills introduced this session pertaining to the integration of land use, transportation, housing affordability, and health within the context of sustainable community development in California. Below are summaries and links to legislative analyses for 21 relevant bills:

2011 Legislative Summaries—Updated June 5, 2011

AB 147 (Dickinson)—Subdivision Map Act

  • Expands the existing eligible uses for transportation mitigation impact fees to transit, bike and pedestrian facilities.

 

to committee.  Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on

GOV. & F.

AB 343 (Atkins) — Community Redevelopment Act

  • Redevelopment Plans and subsequent projects to be in alignment with climate, air quality and energy conservation goals of Chapter 728 of the Statutes of 2008.

 

AB 345 (Atkins) – Caltrans to consult with bike/pedestrian reps on traffic control devices.

  • Caltrans to convene an advisory committee of representatives from groups representing bicycle and pedestrian users of streets, roads and highways and consult with this group regarding the installation of traffic control barriers and/or devices.

 

AB 441 (Monning)–Health issues included in transportation plans.

  • Requires the California Transportation Commission to include health issues in regional transportation plans. The Office of Planning and Research would develop guidelines for local government and regional agencies to incorporate health (improvement) issues into general plans.

 

 

AB 539 (Williams) – Safe Routes to School speed limits.

AB 605 (Dickinson) – OPR to set standards for VMT reductions and CEQA exemptions.

  • A project could be exempt from CEQA analysis of transportation element if project met percentage reduction in vehicle trip miles.

 

AB 650 (Blumenfield) – Blue Ribbon Task Force on Public Transportation for the 21st Century

  • Requires task force to be comprised of twelve transportation subject matter experts to prepare a written report which would include findings and recommendations regarding the current state of CA’s transit system, costs of creating the needed system, and potential funding sources.

 

AB 676 (Torres)–Expands use of transportation funds.

  • Existing transportation expenditures are currently legally obligated for transportation related administration, operation, maintenance, local assistance, safety and rehabilitation projects. This bill would allocate remaining funds for the study of, and development and implementation of,capital improvement projects to be programmed in the state transportation improvement program.

 

AB 710 (Skinner) –Infill Development and Sustainable Community Act of 2011.

  • Eliminates minimum parking requirements for infill and transit-oriented development. Prohibits city or county from requiring more than one parking space per residential unit and prohibits requirement of more than one parking space per 1,000 sq. ft of commercial units for residential or mixed-use project in a transit intensive area. Also modifies definition of sustainable communities to include communities that incentivize infill development.

 

AB 819 (Wieckowski) –Enhance bicycle safety, complete streets.

  • This bill augments existing Dept. of Transportation responsibility for safety guidelines to include class IV bikeways, in addition to class I, II and III bikeways. The bill defines class IV bikeways as: “segregated bike lanes,” which provide a completely separated right-of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycles on streets and are demarcated by either a physical barrier or by distinct paint markings, or both, to minimize or prevent travel by motor vehicles.

 

AB 931 (Dickinson) –CEQA exemption rule for infill housing modification.

  • CEQA requirements are exempted for infill development if certain criteria are met. This bill would extend the current criteria for the preparation of a community-level environmental review from 5 to 20 years. It would also lower the density requirement for exemption from 20 to 15 units per acre.

 

AB 995 (Cedillo) – OPR report to legislatureon expediting Transit Oriented Development environmental review.

  • This bill would require the Office of Planning and Research, not later than July 1, 2012, to prepare and submit to the Legislature a report containing recommendations for expedited environmental review for transit-oriented development.

 

AB 1285 (Fuentes) — Regional greenhouse gas emission reduction program.

 

  • Legislation to create community greenhouse gas emission reduction program. Would provide state oversight over local government and nonprofit investments relating to greenhouse gasses.

 

SB 77 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) — Elimination of state redevelopment agencies.

  • Elimination of state redevelopment agencies (RDAs) and an orderly “wind down” of their responsibilities and assets. Local Govt successor agencies would be created to maintain certain existing RDA obligations. Elimination of state RDA’s has been identified as a method to balance the state’s budget. Property taxes that formerly went to RDAs would be directed to schools and public safety operations. The bill will result in $1.7 billion in additional funding for the 2011-2012 budget.

 

 

SB 132 (Lowenthal) — School sittings to reflect state planning priorities.

  • This bill would require the State Allocation Board to revise guidelines, rules, regulations, procedures, and policiesfor the acquisition of schoolsites and the construction of school facilities to reflect the state planning. This bill would also require that advice, standards, surveys, or information regarding the acquisition of school sites or the construction of school facilities provided by the StateDepartment of Education pursuant to this requirement reflect the state planning priorities.

 

SB 214 (Wolk) – Eliminate voter approval requirement for infrastructure finance districts.

  • This bill would eliminate the requirement of voter approval to create and authorize an infrastructure financing district. This bill would authorize a legislative body to create an infrastructure finance district, adopt an infrastructure financing plan, and issue bonds by resolutions by resolution, not requiring voter approval.

 

SB 310 (Hancock).–.Creation of the Transit Priority Project Program.

  • This bill would eliminate the requirement of voter approval for the creation of an infrastructure financing district and would authorize the appropriate legislative body to create the district, adopt the plan, and issue the bonds by resolutions. This bill would also create a streamlined permit process for development that met certain criteria and it would create a program to reimburse developer fees if a project was located within an Infrastructure Finance District.

 

SB 450 (Lowenthal) – Redevelopment agencies housing expenditures.

  • This bill reforms how redevelopment agencies spend their Low &Moderate Income Housing Funds.

 

SB 468 (Kehoe).–.An act to add Section 103 to the Streets and Highways Code, relating to transportation.

  • This bill would impose additional requirements on the departmentwith respect to proposed capacity-increasing state highway projects in the coastal zone, including requiring the department to collaborate with local agencies, the California Coastal Commission, and countywide or regional transportation planning agencies to develop traffic congestion reduction goals.

 

SB 535 (De Leon) — California Communities Healthy Air Revitalization Trust.

  • This bill would require a minimum of 10% of revenues generated from fees collected by the Air Resources Board from sources of greenhouse gas emissions would be deposited into a trust operated by the CA Treasury Dept. Funds would be in used in communities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or to mitigate health or environmental impacts of climate change.

 

SB 907 (Evans and Perez)–.Master Plan for Infrastructure Financing and Development Commission

  • This bill would create the Master Plan for Infrastructure Financing and Development Commission, consisting of specified members, and would require the commission to prepare and submit a strategy and plan for infrastructure development in California that meets certain criteria to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 2013..

 

categories California Policy, GHG Reduction, Local Government, Metropolitan Planning, Public Transit, Transportation Funding

May 22 Update: CA 2011-12 Legislative Session Overview

comments Comments (0)
By Lauren Michele, May 23, 2011

Policy in Motion is tracking a handful of bills introduced this session pertaining to the integration of land use, transportation, housing affordability, and health within the context of sustainable community development in California. Below are summaries and links to legislative analyses for 21 relevant bills:

2011 Legislative Summaries—Updated May 22th, 2011

AB 147 (Dickinson)—Subdivision Map Act

  • Expands the existing eligible uses for transportation mitigation impact fees to transit, bike and pedestrian facilities.

AB 343 (Atkins) — Community Redevelopment Act

  • Redevelopment Plans and subsequent projects to be in alignment with climate, air quality and energy conservation goals of Chapter 728 of the Statutes of 2008.

AB 345 (Atkins) – Caltrans to consult with bike/pedestrian reps on traffic control devices.

  • Caltrans to convene an advisory committee of representatives from groups representing bicycle and pedestrian users of streets, roads and highways and consult with this group regarding the installation of traffic control barriers and/or devices.

AB 441 (Monning)–Health issues included in transportation plans.

  • Requires the California Transportation Commission to include health issues in regional transportation plans. The Office of Planning and Research would develop guidelines for local government and regional agencies to incorporate health (improvement) issues into general plans.

AB 539 (Williams) – Safe Routes to School speed limits.

AB 605 (Dickinson) – OPR to set standards for VMT reductions and CEQA exemptions.

  • A project could be exempt from CEQA analysis of transportation element if project met percentage reduction in vehicle trip miles.

AB 650 (Blumenfield) – Blue Ribbon Task Force on Public Transportation for the 21st Century

  • Requires task force to be comprised of twelve transportation subject matter experts to prepare a written report which would include findings and recommendations regarding the current state of CA’s transit system, costs of creating the needed system, and potential funding sources.

AB 676 (Torres)–Expands use of transportation funds.

  • Existing transportation expenditures are currently legally obligated for transportation related administration, operation, maintenance, local assistance, safety and rehabilitation projects. This bill would allocate remaining funds for the study of, and development and implementation of,capital improvement projects to be programmed in the state transportation improvement program.

AB 710 (Skinner) –Infill Development and Sustainable Community Act of 2011.

  • Eliminates minimum parking requirements for infill and transit-oriented development. Prohibits city or county from requiring more than one parking space per residential unit and prohibits requirement of more than one parking space per 1,000 sq. ft of commercial units for residential or mixed-use project in a transit intensive area. Also modifies definition of sustainable communities to include communities that incentivize infill development.
  • Leg Info Bill Text (Amended April 25)
  • AB 710 Bill Analysis (Assembly Floor May 20)
  • Status: AB 710 Passed in Housing and Community Development on April 27, do pass committee on Local Govt, re-referred to committee on Appropriations. May 19, ordered to third reading.

AB 819 (Wieckowski) –Enhance bicycle safety, complete streets.

  • This bill augments existing Dept. of Transportation responsibility for safety guidelines to include class IV bikeways, in addition to class I, II and III bikeways. The bill defines class IV bikeways as: “segregated bike lanes,” which provide a completely separated right-of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycles on streets and are demarcated by either a physical barrier or by distinct paint markings, or both, to minimize or prevent travel by motor vehicles.

AB 931 (Dickinson) –CEQA exemption rule for infill housing modification.

  • CEQA requirements are exempted for infill development if certain criteria are met. This bill would extend the current criteria for the preparation of a community-level environmental review from 5 to 20 years. It would also lower the density requirement for exemption from 20 to 15 units per acre.

AB 995 (Cedillo) – OPR report to legislatureon expediting Transit Oriented Development environmental review.

  • This bill would require the Office of Planning and Research, not later than July 1, 2012, to prepare and submit to the Legislature a report containing recommendations for expedited environmental review for transit-oriented development.

AB 1285 (Fuentes) — Regional greenhouse gas emission reduction program.

  • Legislation to create community greenhouse gas emission reduction program. Would provide state oversight over local government and nonprofit investments relating to greenhouse gasses.

SB 77 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) — Elimination of state redevelopment agencies.

  • Elimination of state redevelopment agencies (RDAs) and an orderly “wind down” of their responsibilities and assets. Local govt successor agencies would be created to maintain certain existing RDA obligations. Elimination of state RDA’s has been identified as a method to balance the state’s budget. Property taxes that formerly went to RDAs would be directed to schools and public safety operations. The bill will result in $1.7 billion in additional funding for the 2011-2012 budget.

SB 132 (Lowenthal) — School sittings to reflect state planning priorities.

  • This bill would require the State Allocation Board to revise guidelines, rules, regulations, procedures, and policiesfor the acquisition of schoolsites and the construction of school facilities to reflect the state planning. This bill would also require that advice, standards, surveys, or information regarding the acquisition of school sites or the construction of school facilities provided by the StateDepartment of Education pursuant to this requirement reflect the state planning priorities.

SB 214 (Wolk) – Eliminate voter approval requirement for infrastructure finance districts.

  • This bill would eliminate the requirement of voter approval to create and authorize an infrastructure financing district. This bill would authorize a legislative body to create an infrastructure finance district, adopt an infrastructure financing plan, and issue bonds by resolutions by resolution, not requiring voter approval.

SB 310 (Hancock).–.Creation of the Transit Priority Project Program.

  • This bill would eliminate the requirement of voter approval for the creation of an infrastructure financing district and would authorize the appropriate legislative body to create the district, adopt the plan, and issue the bonds by resolutions. This bill would also create a streamlined permit process for development that met certain criteria and it would create a program to reimburse developer fees if a project was located within an Infrastructure Finance District.

SB 450 (Lowenthal) – Redevelopment agencies housing expenditures.

  • This bill reforms how redevelopment agencies spend their Low &Moderate Income Housing Funds.

SB 468 (Kehoe).–.An act to add Section 103 to the Streets and Highways Code, relating to transportation.

  • This bill would impose additional requirements on the departmentwith respect to proposed capacity-increasing state highway projects in the coastal zone, including requiring the department to collaborate with local agencies, the California Coastal Commission, and countywide or regional transportation planning agencies to develop traffic congestion reduction goals.

SB 535 (De Leon) — California Communities Healthy Air Revitalization Trust.

  • This bill would require a minimum of 10% of revenues generated from fees collected by the Air Resources Board from sources of greenhouse gas emissions would be deposited into a trust operated by the CA Treasury Dept. Funds would be in used in communities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or to mitigate health or environmental impacts of climate change.
  • Leg Info: Bill Text (Amended March 24)
  • SB 535 Bill Analysis (Senate Committee; May 16)
  • Status May 2: Do pass and re-refer to Committee on Appropriations. Hearing set for May 16. Placed on Senate Appropriations suspense file, hearing set for May 26th.

SB 907 (Evans and Perez) –.Master Plan for Infrastructure Financing and Development Commission

  • This bill would create the Master Plan for Infrastructure Financing and Development Commission, consisting of specified members, and would require the commission to prepare and submit a strategy and plan for infrastructure development in California that meets certain criteria to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 2013..
  • SB 907 Leg Info Bill Text (Amended May 3 )
  • SB 907 Bill Analysis (Senate Committee; May 16)
  • Status: Do Pass Senate Committee on Govt and Finance. May 3: amended and re-referred to Committee on Appropriations. Placed on Appropriations suspense file. Hearing set for May 26.

categories California Policy, Metropolitan Planning, NewsFlash, Public Transit, Transportation Funding

Policy in Motion Provides Support for TransForm’s “Invest in Transit” Campaign

comments Comments (0)
By Lauren Michele, March 28, 2011

Invest in Transit

Learn More Here to Sign on Your Support!

Invest in Transit is a statewide campaign targeted at California’s leaders to make public transportation fast, frequent and affordable. It was launched in response to crippling shortfalls for public transportation, continued state funding cuts, and a recognition that our economy, environment, and quality of life truly ride on whether or not we invest in transit now.

Invest in Transit is a campaign of TransForm, an award-winning nonprofit dedicated to creating world-class public transportation and walkable communities throughout California. Invest in Transit seeks to show our leaders that individuals, businesses, and organizations across the state want to get public transportation back on track.

CALIFORNIA’S PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION HAS LOST BILLIONS
Billions of dollars for California’s public transportation has been redirected for other uses over the past decade. Public transportation received less than 1 of 5 state dollars it should have between 2004 and 2008! You can see the negative impacts in every community: reduced service, higher fares, and broken down buses and trains.

BUT OUR STATE LEADERS CAN TURN THINGS AROUND
If our state leaders take action in two ways, they can get California back on track with building and maintaining robust, efficient public transportation throughout the state:

    • Protect state funding for public transportation from being taken for other uses, plus set funding at levels that ensures transit runs safely and meets the needs of a rapidly growing population.
    • Give local and regional entities more authority to establish and manage their own funding sources for public transportation.

    • INVESTING IN TRANSIT OFFERS GREAT RETURNS FOR INDIVIDUALS AND GOVERNMENTS
    California households with good public transportation save thousands of dollars each year in transportation costs compared with California households with little or no access. Gas prices are only the beginning of a long list of expenses that come with driving: insurance, parking, tolls, maintenance, and even the occasional parking ticket quickly add up to a lot. AAA listed the cost of owning and driving a medium-sized sedan 10,000 miles in 2010 at $7,285.

    Good public transportation also triggers the kind of efficient, transit-oriented development that saves governments on a range of infrastructure costs: roads, water supply, and utilities. Given our struggling state and local budgets, investing in transit is a way to create needed savings.

    LEARN MORE ABOUT STATE LEGISLATION AND SPECIFIC POLICIES
    For more detailed information on TransForm’s work to win world-class public transportation across California, visit TransForm’s website. You can read about current legislation we’ve taken a position on and the latest on the policy front including analysis and proposed policies.

    categories California Policy, NewsFlash, Public Transit, Transportation Funding

    Reconnecting America: MTC Commits $10 Million to the Bay Area Transit-Oriented Affordable Housing Fund

    comments Comments (0)
    By Lauren Michele, March 23, 2011

    For Immediate Release
    Contact Rebecca M. (Becky) Sullivan
    Communications Director
    (w) 202-429-6990, ext. 206
    (c) 202-412-5573
    bsullivan@reconnectingamerica.org
    March 23, 2011

    RECONNECTING AMERICA LAUDS METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FUNDING FOR
    TRANSIT-ORIENTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING

    (March 23, 2011) Today, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) – the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the San Francisco Bay Area – officially committed $10 million to the Bay Area Transit-Oriented Affordable Housing Fund (TOAH Fund). MTC’s critical commitment to play the top-loss role in the fund has been instrumental in raising the additional capital. The fund will launch at the end of March with MTC’s $10 million matched by $40 million in foundation and private funding.

    “Without MTC’s initial investment, it is unlikely this would have been possible at all, let alone so quickly,” said Reconnecting America’s Chief of Staff Allison Brooks. “Reconnecting America is delighted that this fund has become a reality, and will result in lasting, sustainable affordable housing for working families in one of the nation’s hottest housing markets.”

    Brooks sits on the advisory board of the fund, which helped to select the fund manager and set the policy parameters and goals for the fund.

    The Bay Area transit-oriented development fund is a revolving fund that will provide loans for both property acquisition and predevelopment costs for affordable housing in transit nodes throughout the region. The goal is to provide affordable capital to allow housing developers to secure and/or develop properties near transit for new development or conversion to affordable housing. Loans will target MTC’s Priority Development Areas with good transit access to regional employment centers.

    The TOAH Fund has been catalyzed by the Great Communities Collaborative and the MTC, and is being managed by a consortium of six community development finance institutions (CDFI) led by the Low Income Investment Fund (LIIF) and comprised of the Enterprise Foundation, Local Initiatives Support Corporation, the Opportunity Fund, Northern California Community Loan Fund and the Corporation for Supportive Housing.

    Reconnecting America and the Center for Transit-Oriented Development (CTOD) have worked for a number of years to help set the stage for this momentous event.

    The fund grew from an effort to help create a financial resource that could be utilized to ensure that transit-oriented communities are enriched with adequate levels of housing affordable to a diversity of incomes in the San Francisco Bay Area. To that end, the Great Communities Collaborative, of which Reconnecting America is a founding member, commissioned the Center for Transit-Oriented Development and the Bay Area Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) to conduct an initial feasibility study for a type of structured fund that would be targeted to acquiring properties near quality transit for the purposes of building and preserving affordable housing, mixed-use development and other critical communities amenities. ( Download the report )

    That report and subsequent work by CTOD staff and members of the Great Communities Collaborative set the stage for the largest commitment of a metropolitan planning organization to a fund of this kind.

    The role of foundations to fund such an effort was described by Reconnecting America and the Center for Transit-Oriented Development in a report exploring the role community development finance institutions could play in promoting equitable transit-oriented development. (Download the report)

    # # #

    Reconnecting America is a national nonprofit that is helping to transform promising ideas into thriving communities – where transportation choices make it easy to get from place to place, where businesses flourish, and where people from all walks of life can afford to live, work and visit. Reconnecting America is the managing partner of the Center for Transit-Oriented Development, the only national nonprofit effort funded by Congress to promote best practices in transit-oriented development. Reconnecting America is also a founding partner of Transportation for America, a broad coalition of housing, environmental, equal opportunity, public health, urban planning, transportation and other organizations focused on creating a 21st century national transportation program. For more information visit our website, www.reconnectingamerica.org

    categories California Policy, Metropolitan Planning, NewsFlash, Public Transit, Transportation Funding

    Sacramento Region Launches $1.5 Million Grant for Sustainable Community Plans

    comments Comments (0)
    By Lauren Michele, February 28, 2011

    Last week the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) held its first “Sacramento Regional Consortium” funded by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program. In partnership with other federal agencies including the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Transportation (DOT), the joint “Partnership for Sustainable Communities” includes the following six objectives which SACOG’s application reflected strongly:

    • Providing more transportation choices.
    • Promoting equitable, affordable housing.
    • Enhancing economic competitiveness.
    • Supporting existing communities.
    • Coordinating policies and leverage investment.
    • Valuing the uniqueness of communities and neighborhoods.

    Lauren Michele highlights key points from the event below.

    Federal Presence

    Cynthia Abbott, Director of HUD’s District 9 Field Office, opened the event praising SACOG’s grant application as being nearly the highest ranked in the country in an extremely competitive process. She pointed to their plan, vision and partnerships as the key elements on why they received a $1.5 million Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant. Other California-based representatives of the Partnership for Sustainable Communities were present, including those from EPA-Region 9, DOT Federal Highway Administration’s California Division, and DOT Federal Transit Administration’s Region IX. In speaking with all four of the federal representatives after the event, it is clear that SACOG’s leadership is being used as a model across the county. While the impacts of the federal budget situation is highly uncertain, the Partnership is hopeful there will be additional Livability grant in the next fiscal year for applicants who did not receive funding during this year’s cycle.

    SACOG’s New Planning Process

    Joe Concannon from SACOG spoke on SACOG’s bottom-up and input-first approach to the development of their Senate Bill 375 required Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS). With an extensive partnership and steering committee including the Urban Land Institute, Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, Regional Water Authority, Valley Vision, and the UC Davis Center for Regional Change, SACOG will be using the $1.5 million federal grant to collaboratively develop performance measures for placing the region’s Transit Priority Areas to work toward their regional per capita greenhouse gas reduction target of 7% by 2020 and 16% by 2035. Transit Priority Areas are defined in SB 375 as 20 dwelling units per acre of residential density within a half mile of transit, and SACOG will be leading a new planning process to engage stakeholders in the initial creation of performance measures for equity, health and economic development. They will be utilizing a “Return on Investment Tool” as well as an “Infrastructure Cost Model” to help guide the process of creating a plan which provides access to opportunities as a priority. As part of the federal grant, SACOG will also integrate their SCS with the Draft Council on Environmental Quality Principles/Guidelines at the federal level.

    Integration with MTP Update

    The Project Manager for SACOG’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan, Kacey Lizon, highlighted that 2/3 of the audience participants has not previously attended a SACOG’s MTP update event. She reviewed the three MTP growth scenarios under review at SACOG, which goals of per capita reductions in vehicle miles traveled between -13 and -15 percent by 2035, and increased transit ridership of up to 82 percent by 2035. While the most aggressive greenhouse gas reduction scenario was selected as the preferred growth option at nearly every MTP outreach workshop, SACOG’s recommended scenario will be a modified version between Scenario #2 and #3 as presented to the public. SACOG’s effort to expand the regional transportation planning process to other sustainability indicators including housing affordability, environmental justice, and economic development is being recognized by the federal government as a well-deserved model on how transportation policy impacts regional health and happiness. In fact, Chris Benner from the UC Davis Center for Regional Change even pointed to relevance of the “Gross National Happiness Index” as used in the country of Butan.

    *The next Regional Consortium will be March 23th to gather input on “Health, Access, and Equity” performance measures*

    Register Here

    categories Environmental Justice, Federal Policy, GHG Reduction, Metropolitan Planning, NewsFlash, Public Health, Public Transit, SB 375, Transportation Funding, US DOT, US HUD

    Public Policy Institute of California’s New Report on SB375 Implementation: Transit & Pricing Challenges

    comments Comments (0)
    By Lauren Michele, February 17, 2011

    Encourage Jobs Near Transit, Raise Cost of Driving to Put State on Road to Change

    Analysis Reveals Signs Of Hope—And Warning—About Meeting SB 375 Goals

    SAN FRANCISCO, February 16, 2011—If California is to achieve its goal of reducing the amount of driving residents do, policymakers should encourage job growth near transit stations and implement strategies that raise the cost of driving, according to a report released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC).

    The PPIC report assesses how well California’s local and regional governments are positioned to meet the targets set under Senate Bill 375, the 2008 law that aims to reduce passenger vehicle use. The law’s main purpose is to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming, but it is also expected to have public health benefits by encouraging more walking and biking. SB 375 calls for the state’s major metropolitan areas to reduce per capita emissions from driving about 7 percent by 2020 and about 15 percent by 2035. This will require a major behavioral shift in California, where the vast majority of commuters still drive to work—even if they live or work near a transit station.

    “The law encourages an integrated approach to reducing emissions—changing land use patterns to reduce the need to drive, investing in mass transit and other alternatives to driving, and increasing the cost of driving and parking to encourage the use of these alternatives. But it will be up to regional and local leaders to turn the vision into reality,” says Ellen Hanak, PPIC senior fellow, who co-authored the report with PPIC research fellow Louise Bedsworth and Jed Kolko, PPIC associate director and research fellow.

    The PPIC analysis draws on a survey of local governments, interviews with land use and transportation planners, and numerous data sources. It reveals reasons for optimism that the state can achieve its goals—but also warning signs.

    On the plus side: Transit ridership is increasing, with recent investments directed toward higher-density areas, where they will be more likely to get people of out their cars. Regional transportation authorities and local governments recognize the importance of integrating land use, transit, and pricing policies such as toll lanes, carpool lanes, and parking fees. And, despite the recession, local governments have increased activities to support the goals of SB 375, and they say the policies they have begun to implement have a strong potential to reduce residents’ driving.

    But the warning signs are significant. California has failed so far to reap the benefits of its large investment in rail transit. While rail ridership has increased slightly—from 0.9 percent of all commutes in 1990 to 1.4 percent in 2008—the growth is much slower than the pace of transit cost increases and service expansion.

    One reason is that transit-oriented development has failed to live up to its potential. Having jobs near transit is more important in boosting ridership than having housing near transit. It’s not hard to see why: while workers can park their cars or bikes at transit stations close to home, they need a way to get to the workplace after getting off the train. But the number of jobs per square mile in California is lower than the national average and declining, a continuation of a decades-long trend of jobs moving out of dense downtowns.

    To encourage job growth around transit, the state should consider changes in SB 375, which explicitly favors residential over commercial development near stations. On the local and regional level, specific policies to spur development near transit include relaxing requirements for minimum numbers of parking spaces provided by developers and improving accessibility to surrounding areas through feeder bus services.

    The PPIC report notes one more important warning sign: resistance to the use of pricing tools, like higher fuel taxes and road use charges, to discourage solo driving. Local and regional officials are wary of public opposition. But these tools have the highest potential to reduce driving, and they can generate revenue to fill the growing gap in transportation budgets. Coastal regions are making limited use of road tolling to manage congestion and raise revenues. For example, high-occupancy toll lanes are in use in Southern California and the Bay Area that combine free access for carpoolers with a toll option for solo drivers. But for more comprehensive road pricing solutions, state and federal officials will need to take the lead, either by raising the gas tax or introducing general road use fees. Such mileage fees—already in use in other countries and successfully tested in Oregon—are more flexible than the gas tax. They rely on new electronic toll collecting and geographic positioning system technology to charge motorists according to the number of miles driven, time of day, type of road, and type of vehicle.

    Driving Change: Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled in Californiais supported with funding from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the David A. Coulter Family Foundation.

    ABOUT PPIC

    PPIC is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research on major economic, social, and political issues. The institute was established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. As a private operating foundation, PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office.

    categories California Policy, GHG Reduction, Local Government, Metropolitan Planning, NewsFlash, Public Transit, Publications, Research, SB 375

    Obama Spreads Valentine Love to Transportation with $556B Proposal: Infrastructure Bank, Livability Grants, Doubling Transit Funds

    comments Comments (0)
    By Lauren Michele, February 16, 2011

    In his 2012 fiscal year budget released on Feb. 14, President Barack Obama proposed a six-year $556 billion surface transportation package. The amount represents a substantial increase in transportation funding and includes an immediate $50 billion cash infusion to create jobs, a proposed national infrastructure bank, and a heavy emphasis on expanding high-speed rail.

    The $556 billion dollar proposal is nearly double the $285 billion package authorized in SAFETEA-LU, the last highway bill, which expired in September 2009. Legislation to establish a new, multi-year investment highway blueprint has languished in Congress for the past two years.

    The budget includes a new FHWA livability grant program totaling $4.1 billion next year and $28 billion over six years. It specifically targets multi-modal transportation hubs and bike/ped/transit access, and formally embraces a “fix-it-first” approach for highways and transit.

    The budget also includes $32 billion in competitive grants to encourage states to adopt safety and livability reforms, as well as $119 billion for transit over the next six years — about double the amount set aside for transit each year under the previous transportation bill.

    The White House has released a fact sheet on the transportation provisions in the President’s budget. [PDF]

    • Provides $13.4 billion in discretionary resources in 2012, a $1.3 billion decrease from 2010 levels. (This figure excludes $109 billion in obligation limitations for the surface transportation plan. Including surface transportation obligation limitations, Department of Transportation’s total budgetary resources increase by $53 billion over 2010.)
    • Includes a six-year, $556 billion surface reauthorization plan to modernize the country’s surface transportation infrastructure, create jobs, and pave the way for long-term economic growth. The President will work with the Congress to ensure that the plan will not increase the deficit.
    • Jump-starts productive investment and stimulates job growth with a first-year funding boost of $50 billion in 2012.
    • Provides $8 billion in 2012 and $53 billion over six years to reach the President’s goal of providing 80 percent of Americans with convenient access to a passenger rail system, featuring high-speed service, within 25 years.
    • Includes $30 billion over six years for a pioneering National Infrastructure Bank to invest in projects of regional or national significance to the economy.
    • Continues to invest in the Next Generation Air Transportation System—a revolutionary modernization of our aviation system.
    • Initiates Transportation Leadership Awards to create incentives for State and local partners to pursue critical transportation policy reforms.
    • Reduces funding for Airport Grants, focusing Federal support on smaller airports, while giving larger airports additional flexibility to raise their own resources.

    categories Federal Policy, High-Speed Rail, Public Transit, Transportation Funding

    High-Speed Rail Commits $30 Million Investment to Southern California

    comments Comments (0)
    By Lauren Michele, January 21, 2011

    SACRAMENTO – The California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) has taken a major step forward in its work to build a truly statewide system with its announcement today that more than $30 million in federal funding will be set aside for property acquisition and railway development in the Los Angeles area.

    The announcement follows several weeks of discussions with the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), which is the funding agent, and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), which has been a planning partner with the CHSRA in Los Angeles County.

    This money is included in the recent grant agreement with the FRA outlining the use of federal funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). The grant agreement also includes $500,000 each for station design in Merced and Bakersfield and $4.5 million total for station area planning in Fresno, Visalia/Kings, Bakersfield, Merced, Palmdale, Gilroy and San Jose, among others.

    The specific use of the funds is still being determined. However, officials from both the CHSRA and Metro indicate that some of the funds dedicated to Southern California may be used to acquire the Los Angeles Union Station property – the region’s primary transportation hub, where three high-speed rail segments will converge.

    Using the funds to acquire the L.A. Union Station site creates independent benefit for existing transportation entities in the region. An L.A. Union Station revamp would improve operations and service for Metro light rail, Amtrak, Metrolink and the Metro bus system. An L.A. Union Station revamp would improve operations and service for Metro light rail, Amtrak, Metrolink and the Metro bus system.

    “Even as we plan to begin construction in the Central Valley – the backbone of a statewide system – we must also steer startup funding in urban areas like L.A. to ensure that regional agencies can begin to set the stage for the arrival of high-speed rail while also benefitting existing infrastructure,” said Roelof van Ark, CEO of the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

    “Metro is thrilled to learn of the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s intent to invest newly acquired federal funds into Southern California,” said L.A County Supervisor and Metro Board Chair Don Knabe. “Metro looks forward to working closely with the High-Speed Rail Authority to make the kind of investments that will be beneficial to both agencies as we build a 21st Century transportation network that will give L.A. County travelers a welcome alternative to traffic and rising gas prices.”

    This infusion of funding will create immediate benefits in the Southern California region; however, the design and environmental impact review process being undertaken by the CHSRA is still underway. Design and environmental engineering teams have been engaged since 2007 with local communities and transportation agencies to design three segments in Southern California: Palmdale-Los Angeles, Los Angeles-Anaheim, and Los Angeles-San Diego, via the Inland Empire. That process is still underway, with Environmental Impact Reports yet to be released.

    “This infusion of funds in Southern California is an exciting reminder of the benefits the high-speed rail project provides, even before construction is complete,” said Tom Umberg, vice chairman of the CHSRA Board. “In addition to creating a safe, efficient and fast alternative for travel within our state, we expect to create 600,000 construction-related jobs over the life of the project, and 450,000 new, permanent jobs once the entire system is built. There’s no question HSR will turn this initial investment into immediate benefits for the region and for the state.”

    The California High-Speed Rail Authority is developing an 800-mile high-speed train system that will operate at speeds of up to 220 miles per hour, connecting the state’s urban centers, including the Bay Area, Fresno, Los Angeles and San Diego. The first phase of the project, projected to cost about $43 billion, will begin operation once the first operable segment (150-200 miles) is built, connecting the system to at least one major metropolitan center. The project is being funded through a voter-approved bond, public-private partnerships and federal grants.

    California has already secured more than $3 billion in federal funding, the most of any state in the nation and a welcome step toward a long-term federal commitment. This incorporates grants under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, as well as federal grants from other sources. Matched with varying levels of state funds, these dollars mean that more than $5.5 billion total is available to begin work on California’s high-speed rail system.

    The federal grant agreement and other documents outlining the ARRA funds are available on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s website. Another grant agreement pertaining to the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program FY 2010 funds, also to be directed to the Central Valley, is forthcoming.

    categories California Policy, High-Speed Rail, NewsFlash, Public Transit, Transportation Funding

    Panorama Theme by Themocracy