MTC Regional Transit Hub
Performance Review Project
Summary Report
Wilbur Smith Associates
Harley & Associates
April 10, 2007
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 1
BACKGROUND
As a requirement of Regional Measure 2, MTC adopted a Transit Connectivity Plan in April 2006 and
incorporated its findings and recommendations into MTC’s Transit Coordination Implementation Plan
pursuant to state statute.
The Connectivity Plan presented general findings and improvement strategies for hub- related improvements
at the 21 regional transit hubs identified in the Plan. Issues for review included wayfinding signs, transit
information displays, real- time displays, station amenities and last mile programs. Five hubs were selected as
prototypical of the transit hubs found in the Bay Area; this subgroup ( San Jose Diridon, El Cerrito del Norte
BART, Dublin/ Pleasanton BART, San Francisco Ferry Terminal/ Embarcadero Station, and San Rafael
Transit Center) served as the basis for recommendations and guidelines developed in the Plan. The complete
Transit Connectivity Plan can be viewed on MTC’s website at: www. mtc. ca. gov/ planning/ connectivity/.
Implementation of the Plan will be conducted in two phases. Phase 1 will focus on wayfinding signage and
transit information. During market research conducted for the 2006 Connectivity Plan, these two
components were found to be critical needs for transit connectivity. In fact, most transit riders, especially
new or infrequent users, requested better directional signage to services at the hub and in the local area, as
well as readily available current schedule information. To make these and other improvements, MTC is
funding capital costs and a portion of the estimated annual replacement/ maintenance costs with State Transit
Assistance ( STA) Regional Discretionary funds approved by the Commission. To be eligible for these funds,
the transit hub owner and/ or transit operators will be responsible for developing improvement plans and cost
estimates to correct identified deficiencies and needs related to wayfinding and transit information.
Phase 2, focused on real- time information, will be funded separately and implemented jointly between MTC
and the transit operators once MTC completes the system architecture.
To facilitate Phase 1 and Phase 2 improvements, hub performance reviews were conducted in fall 2006 at
each of the 24 regional hubs. This included the 21 hubs originally identified in the Plan plus the three
international airports as listed in Table 1. Napa Transit Center was under construction at the time of these
initial reviews and consequently was not included in the current review effort. A hub task force comprised of
partner transit agencies and other local jurisdictions was convened at each of the regional hubs to identify
existing wayfinding signage, transit information, and real- time signage deficiencies and needs. A checklist,
included in Appendix A, was used for the assessment.
The findings of the hub performance review have identified deficiencies and needed improvements to
wayfinding signage, customer transit information, and real- time signage to enhance connectivity of the hub.
This report presents the key issues from the hub review and discusses the ‘ next steps’ for implementation.
Findings by hub are summarized in Table 2. Specifics for each hub can be found in the individual task review
reports in Appendix B.
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 2
KEY FINDINGS
While the San Francisco Bay Area has one of the best developed transit systems in the world, it is also one of
the most complex involving more than 20 transit operators providing a variety of service types. Each agency
has its own unique policies, procedures and operating practices best suited for their immediate service areas
and not always appropriate for regional travel and transit connectivity.
The transit rider generally has one purpose in mind - getting from their starting point to their end point on
transit with the greatest ease and convenience and at the lowest cost possible. The customer’s ease of
transferring from one transit system to another is “ connectivity.” Good connectivity will offer a multi-operator
trip that is nearly as easy as a single operator trip; good connectivity can attract new transit riders —
and retain existing riders.
One of the challenges for transit operators and the region, and the focus of the current phase of
implementation of the Connectivity Plan, is to provide wayfinding and customer information at each regional
hub that is consistent and meets the needs of the riders but flexible enough to be incorporated by transit
operators into their daily operations. The variety of transit modes, hub sizes and architectural styles found
within this region adds to the complexity of implementing a successful connectivity program. Consequently,
it is important to find the commonalities between the hubs and provide the improvements that meet the
needs of all riders whether they are riding a ferry, bus, train or combination of modes. In fact, it was found
that most of the hubs have common characteristics both in the identified deficiencies and recommended
corrective actions.
Table 1
Regional Transit Hubs
􀁸 Dublin/ Pleasanton BART 􀁸 Millbrae BART
􀁸 Fremont BART 􀁸 San Jose Diridon Station
􀁸 Oakland 12th Street BART 􀁸 Palo Alto Station
􀁸 Coliseum Oakland Airport BART 􀁸 Great America Station
􀁸 Pleasant Hill BART 􀁸 Mountain View Station
􀁸 El Cerrito Del Norte BART 􀁸 Vallejo Ferry Terminal
􀁸 Richmond BART/ Amtrak 􀁸 Santa Rosa Transit Center
􀁸 San Rafael Transit Center 􀁸 Napa Intermodal
􀁸 San Francisco Ferry Terminal/ Embarcadero BART 􀁸 Fairfield Transportation Center
􀁸 Transbay Terminal/ Montgomery BART 􀁸 Oakland International Airport
􀁸 Civic Center 􀁸 San Francisco International Airport
􀁸 Caltrain Station 4th & King 􀁸 San Jose International Airport
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 3
Identified Deficiencies
Most of the deficiencies identified during the hub reviews were not unique to any particular hub but were
found repeatedly throughout the system. This fact provides the opportunity to develop consistent measures
that will improve connectivity between transit systems. ( Specific deficiencies for each hub are included in
Appendix B.) Deficiencies most frequently found include:
􀁸 There was a lack of consistency with the design of the signs and information displays used at the hub.
􀁸 Direction between the various services/ operators at the hub was limited. Both signage and maps to
provide that information were lacking or out- of- date.
􀁸 Exiting directional signage was most in need of improvement including direction to other services,
streets and key destinations. In particular, signage to connecting transit boarding areas – especially bus
stops – was inadequate.
􀁸 Entry signs to the hub were often lacking or not visible enough. In addition, entry signs often did not
include the station name or identification of services available ( operator logos).
􀁸 Most hubs did not provide adequate comprehensive and up to date regional transit information.
􀁸 Customer information for the specific services at the hub was generally available although on occasion
an operator was not represented. However, information displays were often difficult to find, hard to
read, and out- dated. There was no consistency in the design, location of displays and/ or the hierarchy
of information that was presented.
􀁸 Maps showing the location of bus boarding areas and destinations in the vicinity were most often not
included in the information displays or the information provided was out- of- date.
􀁸 Real- time information was not available at many of the hubs; signage that was available was limited to
a single operator ( as in the case of BART and Muni Metro platform signage), was not operational
pending needed technology ( Caltrain stations) or was provided for only a few routes ( AC Transit real-time
demonstration at El Cerrito del Norte).
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 4
Corrective Measures
The following measures are recommended to correct the deficiencies listed above. ( Specific corrective
measures for each hub are included in Appendix B). There is opportunity in the application of these
measures to design for and accommodate the architectural style of the individual hub. However, some level
of consistency should be maintained between the hubs for some of these elements ( such as RTICs) to ensure
a level of product recognition by transit riders.
􀁸 Include operator logos and station names on station entry signs.
􀁸 Expand the use of operator logos on wayfinding signage for easy customer recognition. In addition,
use international icons and symbols where appropriate, such as the information identifier (‘ i’ or ‘?’) at
customer information displays.
􀁸 Install signs at all decision points in the hub, which direct passengers to entries and exits, information
displays and between transit boarding areas.
􀁸 Use a consistent set of graphics, fonts, colors and arrow designs for directional signs.
􀁸 Provide RTIC displays at each hub including:
1. The regional 511. org transit map;
2. Subregional or system maps for local operators.
3. Schedules and service hours;
4. Fares and specific system information;
5. Hub layout maps;
6. Local vicinity maps; and
7. Identification of 511 as a phone/ web contact point for more detailed information.
􀁸 Real- time signage should be available for all service providers at the hub and should be placed in a
central visible location. At a minimum, the following information should be included:
1. Arrival/ departure time;
2. Service provider name or logo; and
3. Route number and/ or destination.
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 5
NEXT STEPS
Action Plan for Developing Wayfinding Signage Improvement Plans
MTC is funding capital costs to make wayfinding information improvements. To be eligible for these funds,
the transit hub owner and/ or transit operators will be required to develop an Improvement Plan to correct
identified deficiencies. The Improvement Plan should identify the specific improvements to be made and
how much they will cost. As the first step in developing an Improvement Plan, hub operators must prepare
an ‘ Action Plan’. For some hubs, the required improvements are simple and involve coordination between
few agencies. Other hubs are more complex both in needed improvements and agency participation.
Because of this complexity, these hubs may require additional assessment before design and construction can
proceed. It should be stressed that one action plan only should be developed for each hub; this will require
cooperation and coordination between the participating agencies. A list of participating agencies for each hub
is shown in Table 2 and includes each transit agency providing service at the hub as well as the local
jurisdiction. It is recommended that MTC select a lead agency to coordinate this effort at each hub and that
the responsibilities for each participant be clearly defined. Funding from MTC may be requested to develop
the action plan particularly for those hubs that are more complex and will require extensive coordination,
assessment or improvements. If necessary, MTC could consider hiring a consultant to create a plan for lead
agencies with limited staff or expertise to complete the work. The Action Plan for wayfinding signage
should include:
1. Identification by MTC of lead agency at each hub to coordinate the wayfinding signage
improvements;
2. Identification of partner responsibilities for the tasks needed for implementation;
3. Description of how the Improvement Plans will be developed, i. e. use of internal staff or
outside consultant, coordination with other agencies, etc.;
4. Description of related efforts currently underway or expected in the near future; and
5. Time frame for completion of the improvement plans.
Aside from wayfinding signage, there are other transit connectivity improvements that will receive regional
funds such as regional transit information cases and real- time information displays. MTC and the transit
agencies will develop an overall approach and schedule for addressing each of these improvements at a future
date.
Implementation
Once the Wayfinding Signage Action Plan is completed and approved by MTC, implementation can proceed.
The ‘ readiness’ of each transit hub in terms of implementation is indicated in Table 2 ( ratings are only to
assess project readiness, and are not rankings on how implementation should proceed). Some hubs may
require additional assessment to define needed improvements before design and preparation of PS& E
documents can occur. These hubs were given a rating of ‘ Medium’. In general, most BART stations are
rated ‘ Medium’. At other hubs, the needed improvements are more straightforward; it is expected that the
development of the implementation documents can progress more quickly. These hubs are given a rating of
‘ High’. Other hubs were also ranked as ‘ High’ because they may be desirable as a demonstration project ( as
in the case of San Francisco Ferry Terminal/ Embarcadero Station) or because of current development
projects at the hub ( as in the case of San Jose and Oakland Airports). Whichever ‘ readiness’ rating is given to
a hub, it is hoped that the lead agency will put every effort into moving the process forward.
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 6
Transit operators can receive reimbursement for the cost of implementing the wayfinding signage
recommendations in the Transit Connectivity Plan ($ 7 million) through State Transit Assistance ( STA)
Regional Discretionary funds. These funds can be requested from MTC for ( 1) preparation of the action
plan, ( 2) reassessment, design and PS& E documents, and ( 3) construction. MTC will provide additional
guidance on reimbursement eligibility before transit agencies develop their Implementation Plans. Operators
are encouraged to find additional funding sources or include some portion of these improvements as part of
other projects.
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 7
Table 2: Summary of Hub Review Findings
( Note: Refer to individual hub reviews in Appendix B for comprehensive findings)
Hub Positive Elements Elements Needing Improvement/
Potential Action Plans
Recommended
Lead Agency
Readiness Participating Agencies
􀁸 WAYFINDING: New wayfinding program that links
bus and shuttles to BART, enhances pedestrian
and bicycle connections and the new
development.
BART Medium;
Include as part
of station
development
plans.
􀁸 CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
1. Dublin/ Pleasanton
BART
Significant bus- and shuttle service is
available for connection to- BART,
the Iron Horse Trail provides bicycle
access, and there are approved
development plans for residential,
retail and parking development at
the hub.
BEST EXAMPLE: BART platform real-time
transit and customer
information signs. Provides audio
and visual announcements ( all BART
station hubs).
􀁸 REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Three locations for an
integrated and accurate real- time sign program.
TBD TBD
Amtrak Bus, BART, County
Connection, Modesto Area
Express/ MAX, San Joaquin
Regional Transit/ SMART,
WHEELS, City of Dublin, City of
Pleasanton
􀁸 WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and
integrated wayfinding and transit connection
signs.
BART Medium
􀁸 CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
2. Fremont BART New bus transit center separates
buses from other pedestrian, bicycle
and auto oriented traffic.
􀁸 REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Two locations for an
integrated and accurate real- time sign program.
TBD TBD
AC Transit, BART, VTA, City of
Fremont
􀁸 WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and
integrated wayfinding and transit connection
signs.
BART Medium
􀁸 CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer, centralized
and better organized customer information for
local and regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
3. Oakland 12th
Street BART
New AC Transit bus improvements on
Broadway and new developments in
downtown Oakland.
􀁸 REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate next bus and
BART real- time information at bus shelters and
at central locations near future RTICs.
TBD TBD
AC Transit, BART, City of
Oakland
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 8
Table 2: Summary of Hub Review Findings
( Note: Refer to individual hub reviews in Appendix B for comprehensive findings)
Hub Positive Elements Elements Needing Improvement/
Potential Action Plans
Recommended
Lead Agency
Readiness Participating Agencies
􀁸 WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and
integrated wayfinding and transit connection
signs.
BART Medium;
include as part
of station
development
plans.
􀁸 CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
4. Coliseum Oakland
Airport BART
This hub provides connection to
Oakland Airport and Oakland
Coliseum from the Bay Area via BART
and Capitol Corridor. Future planned
neighborhood and business
improvements, Oakland Airport
Connector and connections to
Amtrak station.
􀁸 REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate next bus and
BART real- time information at key bus shelters
and at central locations near future RTICs
TBD TBD
AC Transit, AirBART, BART,
Capitol Corridor JPA, City of
Oakland, Port of Oakland
􀁸 WAYFINDING: New wayfinding program that links
bus and to BART, enhances pedestrian and
bicycle connections and the planned new
developments.
BART Medium;
Include as part
of station
development
plans.
􀁸 CUSTOMER INFORMATION: More organized and
clearer local and regional ( RTIC) customer
information.
TBD TBD
5. Pleasant Hill BART This hub is in a redevelopment area
that has seen completion of
significant residential and office
commercial projects. Significant
redesign of the hub and additional
development is planned in the next
five to ten years. Good bicycle and
pedestrian access is available via the
Iron Horse Trail.
􀁸 REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Central pedestrian
plaza location for an integrated and accurate
real- time sign program.
TBD TBD
BART, Benicia Transit, County
Connection, Fairfield/ Suisun
Transit, WHEELS, County of
Contra Costa
􀁸 WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and
integrated wayfinding and transit connection
signs.
BART Medium
􀁸 CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
6. El Cerrito Del
Norte BART
This hub functions as an end- of- line
station with major regional bus
connections.
􀁸 REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate next bus and
BART real- time information at key bus shelters
and at central locations near future RTICs.
TBD TBD
AC Transit, BART,
Fairfield/ Suisun Transit, GGT,
Vallejo Transit, Westcat, City of
El Cerrito
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 9
Table 2: Summary of Hub Review Findings
( Note: Refer to individual hub reviews in Appendix B for comprehensive findings)
Hub Positive Elements Elements Needing Improvement/
Potential Action Plans
Recommended
Lead Agency
Readiness Participating Agencies
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding and transit connection signs.
BART Medium;
include as part
of current
station
development
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
7. Richmond
BART/ Amtrak
This hub provides the transfer
station between BART and San
Joaquin Amtrak trains and one of
two transfer points between BART
and Capitol Corridor service; new
transit center is almost complete.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate next bus and
BART real- time information at key bus shelters and
at central locations near future RTICs and in the
new transit center.
TBD TBD
AC Transit, BART, Capitol
Corridor JPA, Caltrans Division
of Rail, GGT, City of Richmond
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for transit connections and access to
downtown activity centers.
Golden Gate
Transit
High
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
8. San Rafael Transit
Center
This hub functions as the primary
transit center in Marin and other
north coast counties. Includes
county shuttle and regional airport
transit services.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate real- time
information at a central location on each loading
platform.
TBD TBD
GGT, Airport Express, Marin
Airporter, Greyhound, County
Shuttle, Sonoma County Transit,
SMART, Marin County Transit
District, City of San Rafael
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for transit connections and access to
downtown activity centers.
BART/ Port of San
Francisco
High; pilot
project to
demonstrate
regional
standards for
Phase 1
improvements.
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
9. San Francisco
Ferry Terminal/
Embarcadero
BART
Currently and historically this hub
has functioned as one of the most
significant transit hubs in the Bay
Area. It integrates ferry, rail, bus
and shuttle transit services.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate real- time
information at a central location in the Ferry
Terminal and the Embarcadero Station.
TBD TBD
BART, GGT, Muni, Vallejo
Transit, Alameda/ Oakland
Ferry, Harbor Bay Ferry,
Tiburon Ferry, Amtrak Bus,
WTA, Port of San Francisco,
City/ County of San Francisco
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 10
Table 2: Summary of Hub Review Findings
( Note: Refer to individual hub reviews in Appendix B for comprehensive findings)
Hub Positive Elements Elements Needing Improvement/
Potential Action Plans
Recommended
Lead Agency
Readiness Participating Agencies
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for transit connections and access to
downtown activity centers.
TJPA/
AC Transit/
BART
Medium;
include as part
of station
planning
process.
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
10. Transbay
Terminal/
Montgomery BART
This hub is unique because of the
proximity of the historical Transbay
Terminal and existing Montgomery
BART and MUNI rail station.
Significant improvements to the
Transbay Terminal are in the
planning stages.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate real- time
information at a central location in the Transbay
Terminal and the Montgomery Station.
TBD TBD
AC Transit, BART, GGT,
Greyhound, Muni, SamTrans,
Westcat, Transbay JPA,
Caltrans, City/ County of San
Francisco
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for transit and bicycle connections and
access to downtown activity centers.
BART Medium
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
11. Civic Center This hub is unique because of its
proximity to federal, state and local
government and activity centers.
Integrates rail, bus, and new bicycle
connections.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate real- time
information at a location central to both BART and
MUNI station agent booths.
TBD TBD
AC Transit, BART, Muni, GGT,
Samtrans, City/ County of San
Francisco
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for transit and bicycle connections and
access to SOMA and Mission Bay activity centers.
Caltrain High
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
12. Caltrain Station
4th & King
This hub is the primary transit
facility in the new SOMA/ Mission Bay
development areas of San Francisco.
It integrates heavy and light rail, bus
and bicycle transit services.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate real- time
information at a central location in the Caltrain
station.
TBD TBD
Caltrain, Muni, Amtrak Bus,
City/ County of San Francisco
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 11
Table 2: Summary of Hub Review Findings
( Note: Refer to individual hub reviews in Appendix B for comprehensive findings)
Hub Positive Elements Elements Needing Improvement/
Potential Action Plans
Recommended
Lead Agency
Readiness Participating Agencies
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding and transit connection signs.
BART Medium
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized presentation of local and regional
customer information ( and ‘ BEST EXAMPLE’ maps)
at centralized displays.
TBD TBD
13. Millbrae BART This hub provides connection
between Caltrain service to the
South Bay and BART service to San
Francisco and East Bay. Also served
by considerable bus and shuttle
services.
BEST EXAMPLES:
( 1) Hub layout, hub vicinity and “ you
are here” maps;
( 2) Real- time bus information.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate existing
SamTrans bus, rail and BART real- time sign
information at central locations.
TBD TBD
BART, Caltrain, Samtrans, City
of Millbrae
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for transit and pedestrian connections.
Caltrain Medium
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
14. San Jose Diridon
Station
This hub provides connection
between heavy and light rail, bus
and shuttle services. New
residential development is under
construction west of this hub.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate accurate real-time
sign information at a central location on each
platform and in the pedestrian tunnel.
TBD TBD
ACE, Amtrak Bus, Caltrain,
Capitol Corridor JPA, Caltrans
Division of Rail,
Monterey/ Salinas Transit, Santa
Cruz MTD, VTA
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding and transit connection signs.
Caltrain Medium
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
15. Palo Alto Station Significant connecting services
between Caltrain, bus and shuttle
services. A new bus transit center
was recently completed at this hub.
New major accessibility
improvements are planned for this
hub.
BEST EXAMPLE: bus transit center
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate Caltrain, bus
and shuttle real- time information at central
locations near future RTICs and in the redesign
plans for the hub.
TBD TBD
AC Transit, Amtrak Bus,
Caltrain, Samtrans, VTA, Union
City Transit, City of Palo Alto
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 12
Table 2: Summary of Hub Review Findings
( Note: Refer to individual hub reviews in Appendix B for comprehensive findings)
Hub Positive Elements Elements Needing Improvement/
Potential Action Plans
Recommended
Lead Agency
Readiness Participating Agencies
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding and connecting signs for bus and light-rail.
VTA High
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
16. Great America
Station
Transfer station between ACE and
Capitol Corridor trains and local
commuter shuttles via color coding.
BEST EXAMPLE: Color coding for
shuttle connections
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate accurate real-time
sign information for all service providers at a
central location.
TBD TBD
ACE, Capitol Corridor JPA, VTA,
City of Santa Clara
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for rail, bus and shuttle transit, bicycle
connections and access to downtown activity
centers.
Caltrain Medium
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
17. Mountain View
Station
Attractive new transit plaza
adjacent to the downtown and a new
VTA light rail station.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate accurate real-time
information for all service providers at VTA
station, Caltrain station and a central location at
the bus transit center.
TBD TBD
Caltrain, VTA, City of Mountain
View
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for ferry and bus transit connections
and access to downtown activity centers.
Vallejo High
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
18. Vallejo Ferry
Terminal
Hub provides connection between
ferry and bus services.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate real- time ferry
and bus information at a central location in the
passenger terminal.
TBD TBD
Vallejo Transit, Benicia Transit,
Napa VINE, City of Vallejo
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 13
Table 2: Summary of Hub Review Findings
( Note: Refer to individual hub reviews in Appendix B for comprehensive findings)
Hub Positive Elements Elements Needing Improvement/
Potential Action Plans
Recommended
Lead Agency
Readiness Participating Agencies
WAYFINDING: Needs comprehensive and integrated
wayfinding for bus transit, bicycle connections and
access to downtown activity centers.
Santa Rosa High;
coordinate
with other
transit mall
improvements
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
19. Santa Rosa Transit
Center
This hub is the primary transit center
for Mendocino and Sonoma Counties.
It is conveniently located in
downtown Santa Rosa near
government and shopping centers.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Integrate real- time bus
information at one or two central locations in the
transit center.
TBD TBD
GGT, Mendocino Transit
Authority, Santa Rosa CityBus,
Sonoma County Transit, City of
Santa Rosa
20. Napa Intermodal Review not conducted – Facility
under construction
N/ A Napa VINE, City of Napa
WAYFINDING: New wayfinding program that links
bus services, enhances pedestrian and bicycle
connections and carpool services.
Fairfield High
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
21. Fairfield
Transportation
Center
New transit center for Solano County
which provides transfer between
transit serving the Bay Area, Solano
County and Sacramento. Functions as
a bus transit center, park/ ride lot
and a carpool facility. Proposal to
expand the facility is in the planning
process.
BEST EXAMPLE: Bus intermodal
facility.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: An integrated and
accurate real- time sign program is planned for the
bus transit center. Real- time signs should be
installed near the transit store.
TBD TBD
Fairfield- Suisun Transit, Rio
Vista Transit, Vallejo Transit,
City of Fairfield
MTC Regional Transit Hub Performance Review Project
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Wilbur Smith Associates/ Harley & Associates Page 14
Table 2: Summary of Hub Review Findings
( Note: Refer to individual hub reviews in Appendix B for comprehensive findings)
Hub Positive Elements Elements Needing Improvement/
Potential Action Plans
Recommended
Lead Agency
Readiness Participating Agencies
WAYFINDING: Continue installation of a wayfinding
sign program at Terminal 1 and 2 which provides
connections to transit and other ground
transportation.
Port of Oakland High;
integrated
with
development
plans at
Terminals 1& 2
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Clearer and more
organized customer information for local and
regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
22. Oakland
International
Airport
Well- designed passenger facility
recently been completed adjacent to
Terminal 2, which clarifies
connections to ground
transportation.
BEST EXAMPLE: wayfinding to ground
transportation and real- time airline
information signs.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Use existing real- time
airline information signs as a model to display
transit information at Terminals 1 and 2.
TBD TBD
AC Transit, AirBART, City of
Oakland, Port of Oakland
WAYFINDING: Expand the existing wayfinding sign
program to make it easier to find BART and the
SamTrans bus loading areas.
City/ County of
San Francisco/
BART
High
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: More customer
information for local and regional ( RTIC) displays.
TBD TBD
23. San Francisco
International
Airport
Locating the BART station at SFO has
provided a significant improvement
for Bay Area regional transit
services.
BEST EXAMPLE: SFO uses a color
coded print information system to
assist passengers with identifying
ground transportation options.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Use existing real- time
airline information signs as a model to display
transit information at central locations throughout
the airport.
TBD TBD
BART, SamTrans, City/ County of
San Francisco
WAYFINDING: Continue installation of a wayfinding
sign program at Terminal A, B and C which provides
connections to transit and other ground
transportation.
City of San Jose High; integrate
with
development
plans for new
terminals
CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Continue to provide
customer information for local and regional ( RTIC)
transit at existing information counters.
TBD TBD
24. San Jose
International
Airport
This hub is currently undergoing an
extensive reconstruction program.
Access to local transit is provided on
an interim basis.
BEST EXAMPLE: excellent wayfinding
sign program and real- time airline
information.
REAL- TIME INFORMATION: Use existing real- time
airline information sign technology as a model to
display transit information at all terminals.
TBD TBD
VTA, City of San Jose
APPENDIX A
Checklist for the Evaluation of Wayfinding Signage, Transit Information and Real- time Signage
MTC Regional Transit Hub Review
( THESE CHECKLISTS WILL BE COLLECTED AT THE END OF THE SURVEY, PLEASE WRITE CLEARLY)
A - 1
Station Name: __________________________________ Date: ___________________
Reviewer: _________________________________ Agency: __________________________________
Identification of station or transit operator
Yes No
1. The hub is clearly identified, visible from surrounding roadways by vehicular and
pedestrian traffic.
Comments
2. Entrances into the hub are clearly identified, visible from approaches by vehicular
and pedestrian traffic.
Comments
3. Transit operators serving the hub are clearly identified at the entrances with their
logo and name.
Comments
4. Station identification reinforces information on printed maps and schedules.
Comments
5. Station name is identified on the entrance sign along with agency logo.
Comments
APPENDIX A
Checklist for the Evaluation of Wayfinding Signage, Transit Information and Real- time Signage
MTC Regional Transit Hub Review
( THESE CHECKLISTS WILL BE COLLECTED AT THE END OF THE SURVEY, PLEASE WRITE CLEARLY)
A - 2
Moving around or entering or exiting the station
Yes No
6. Agency logos are included with names on directional signs within the facility.
Comments
7. Turnstile level street exit directional signs also include connection agency names
and logs.
Comments
8. Vital connections information is grouped together on signs.
Comments
9. Connection directions are provided at each decision point and there are no gaps in
the connection directional information flow.
Comments
10. Exiting directional signs list a hierarchy of the popular destinations and connecting
services to reach these destinations.
Comments
11. Where connecting transit service is not within the station, clear directional signage
( including walking distance) is provided to these services. All sign placement
complies with 2004 ADAAG guidelines.
Comments
12. In stations with multiple track/ gate or train/ ferry service, confirmation of agency,
destination, and real- time departure is associated with those services.
Comments
13. Clear sightlines are maintained to signs and all sign placement complies with 2004
ADAAG guidelines.
Comments
14. Exiting connection information is color- coded to emphasize and make it easier to
find directions and connections.
Comments
15. Signs are legible with adequate message size appropriate for viewing distance,
proper contrast ratios, and illumination levels.
Comments
16. Arrows are of consistent design and are bold in visual balance with text and are
closely associated with their messages.
Comments
APPENDIX A
Checklist for the Evaluation of Wayfinding Signage, Transit Information and Real- time Signage
MTC Regional Transit Hub Review
( THESE CHECKLISTS WILL BE COLLECTED AT THE END OF THE SURVEY, PLEASE WRITE CLEARLY)
A - 3
Identification of where to board or wait for transit
Yes No
17. Transit boarding platforms are clearly and boldly identified.
Comments
18. Where a particular transit route utilizes different boarding points for opposite
directions of travel, directional signage is provided to the different boarding point
including platform route number, name, and route terminus ( a place name).
Comments
19. At commuter rail, ferry terminals or bus stations, the boarding area identification
number is large and bold with service agency, destination, number, and “ real- time”
departure is provided.
Comments
20. Schedule frequency and last departure information are provided at transit boarding
platforms and are consistent with 2004 ADAAG guidelines.
Comments
21. Bus stop signs have agency logos large and bold.
Comments
22. Bus stop signs have accessibility and parking restrictions as auxiliary signs below the
basic bus stop signs.
Comments
23. Bus route identification on bus stop signs comply with 2004 ADAAG Guidelines –
minimum 2” route number character height.
Comments
24. Bus stop sign faces are visible from each approach direction.
Comments
25. Bus shelters have associated bus stop signs which are consistent with the design
guidelines described in this checklist.
Comments
APPENDIX A
Checklist for the Evaluation of Wayfinding Signage, Transit Information and Real- time Signage
MTC Regional Transit Hub Review
( THESE CHECKLISTS WILL BE COLLECTED AT THE END OF THE SURVEY, PLEASE WRITE CLEARLY)
A - 4
Transit Information for Pre- Trip and Enroute Planning
Yes No
26. Transit information in Regional Transit Information Display Cases is accurate and
easy to read.
Comments
27. Transit operator and route maps for the nine- county San Francisco Bay Area are
posted in the Regional Transit Information Display Cases.
Comments
28. Hub specific information is provided in a case adjacent to the Regional Transit
Information Display Case and at other critical locations at the hub.
Comments
29. Hub layout maps are provided in the hub information display case.
Comments
30. Map of hub vicinity with landmarks and attractions is posted in the hub information
case.
Comments
31. Posted transit information ( i. e. maps, schedules) is well maintained, accurate and
easy to find.
Comments
32. Schedules, fare, transfer information and hub layout maps are located near bus
stops and loading platforms.
Comments
33. Printed schedules and maps distributed at the hub contain accurate information and
are consistent with the information provided in the Regional Transit Information
Display Cases.
Comments
APPENDIX A
Checklist for the Evaluation of Wayfinding Signage, Transit Information and Real- time Signage
MTC Regional Transit Hub Review
( THESE CHECKLISTS WILL BE COLLECTED AT THE END OF THE SURVEY, PLEASE WRITE CLEARLY)
A - 5
Existing Real- Time Signage
Yes No
34. Real- time signage is provided at the hub.
Describe Real- time signage including
35. Location of signs ( indicate on station diagram).
36. Description and photo of signage types.
37. Identification of transit services included on real- time signage ( Include operator and
mode).
Future Real- Time Signage Installations
38. Describe location( s) for future real- time signage locations ( indicate on station
diagram). Refer to Appendix A Real- Time Technology Guidelines page A- 24
39. Describe transit services that would be included in real- time signage displays. Refer
to Appendix A pages A- 24- 26.
APPENDIX B
Hub Review Summary Reports
The Hub Review Summary Reports prepared for each of the regional hubs are provided here in the following
order:
􀁸 Dublin/ Pleasanton BART
􀁸 Fremont BART
􀁸 Oakland 12th Street BART
􀁸 Coliseum Oakland Airport BART
􀁸 Pleasant Hill BART
􀁸 El Cerrito Del Norte BART
􀁸 Richmond BART/ Amtrak
􀁸 San Rafael Transit Center
􀁸 San Francisco Ferry Terminal/ Embarcadero BART
􀁸 Transbay Terminal/ Montgomery BART
􀁸 Civic Center
􀁸 Caltrain Station 4th & King
􀁸 Millbrae BART
􀁸 San Jose Diridon Station
􀁸 Palo Alto Station
􀁸 Great America Station
􀁸 Mountain View Station
􀁸 Vallejo Ferry Terminal
􀁸 Santa Rosa Transit Center
􀁸 Napa Intermodal ( This hub was under construction at the time of this review)
􀁸 Fairfield Transportation Center
􀁸 Oakland International Airport
􀁸 San Francisco International Airport
􀁸 San Jose International Airport