FEHR & PEERS
T R A N S P O R TAT I O N C O N S U LTA N T S
Final
MacArthur BART Station
Access Feasibility Study
332 Pine Street, 4th Floor
San Francisco, CA
SF06- 0245
May 2008
1
PREPARED BY
Matthew Ridgway, Principal
Meghan Mitman, Transportation Planner/ Engineer
Emily Johnson, Transportation Engineer
Sam Tabibnia, Senior Transportation Engineer
Greg Saur, Senior Transportation Engineer
ON BEHALF OF
Kathy Kleinbaum, Community and Economic Development Agency ( CEDA), Redevelopment Division
Mohamed Alaoui, CEDA, Transportation Services Division
Jason Patton, CEDA, Transportation Services Division
Jeff Ordway, Manager of Property Development
Val Menotti, Manager of Alameda County Planning
F. Kenya Wheeler, Senior Planner
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
Lynette Dias, Principal
Charity Wagner, Senior Planner
Joe McCarthy, MacArthur Transit Community Partners, LLC
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... .......... 8
Purpose ............................................................................................................................... ............................... 8
Background..................................................................................................................... .................................... 8
Existing Conditions and Access Objectives ........................................................................................................ 9
Access Strategies..................................................................................................................... ........................ 10
Funding Sources........................................................................................................................ ....................... 16
Proposed Development and Related Access Recommendations..................................................................... 16
2. Introduction................................................................................................................... .................................. 17
Background/ Relevant BART Policies ............................................................................................................... 17
Report Organization ............................................................................................................................... .......... 21
3. Setting and Access Considerations .............................................................................................................. 24
Overview....................................................................................................................... .................................... 24
BART Train Services ............................................................................................................................... ......... 24
Origins and Destinations Surrounding the BART Station.................................................................................. 25
BART Ridership...................................................................................................................... .......................... 26
4. Pedestrian Access......................................................................................................................... ................. 35
Existing Pedestrian Facilities and Conditions.................................................................................................... 35
Planned Improvements................................................................................................................... .................. 38
Pedestrian Access Objectives..................................................................................................................... ..... 42
5. Transit Access ............................................................................................................................... ................. 43
Existing Transit Facilities, Services, and Conditions......................................................................................... 43
Planned Improvements................................................................................................................... .................. 53
Transit Access Objectives ............................................................................................................................... . 53
6. Bicycle Access......................................................................................................................... ....................... 54
Existing Bicycle Facilities and Conditions ......................................................................................................... 54
Planned Improvements................................................................................................................... .................. 61
Bicycle Access Objectives..................................................................................................................... ........... 61
7. Auto Access......................................................................................................................... ........................... 63
Existing Roadway System and Conditions........................................................................................................ 63
Existing Parking Facilities and Conditions......................................................................................................... 71
Planned Improvements................................................................................................................... .................. 75
Auto Access Objectives..................................................................................................................... ............... 75
8. Access Strategies: Overview ......................................................................................................................... 76
Tier Zero Strategies..................................................................................................................... ..................... 77
Overall strategy Implementation................................................................................................................. ...... 80
9. Tier One Strategies..................................................................................................................... .................... 81
Preferential Parking for Car/ Vanpool................................................................................................................. 82
10- Hour Metered Parking on 40th Street and West MacArthur Boulevard ........................................................ 83
Electronic Bicycle Lockers........................................................................................................................ ........ 85
AC Transit and Neighborhood Shuttle Access Improvements .......................................................................... 86
Expanded Motorcycle/ Scooter Parking ............................................................................................................ 91
Attended Parking ............................................................................................................................... ............... 91
Transit Discounts for Car/ Vanpool..................................................................................................................... 92
Wayfinding Signs within the Station Area.......................................................................................................... 93
Safety Stop ............................................................................................................................... ........................ 94
3
Wayfinding Signs To/ From Nearby Neighborhoods and Destinations .............................................................. 95
Station Area Maps ............................................................................................................................... ............. 96
Market Rate BART Parking ............................................................................................................................... 96
Guaranteed Ride Home Program/ Taxi Service................................................................................................ 97
WIth Transit Village Development Only: Remote Parking for the Transit Village and BART............................ 98
WIth Transit Village Development Only: Passenger Drop- Off Improvements .................................................. 99
With Transit Village Development Only: Station and Village “ Branding”........................................................... 99
WIth Transit Village Development Only: Carsharing....................................................................................... 100
10. Tier Two Strategies ............................................................................................................................... ....... 102
Parking Benefit District ............................................................................................................................... .... 103
Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements ......................................................................................................... 103
Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements ............................................................................................................... 114
High Capacity Bicycle Parking........................................................................................................................ 117
Volunteer Neighborhood Guides ..................................................................................................................... 118
Blue Light Phones/ Personal Security Improvements ..................................................................................... 118
Neighborhood Ridematching and Ridesharing................................................................................................ 119
Station/ TDM Website........................................................................................................................ ............. 120
Smart Parking ( Variable Message Signs) ....................................................................................................... 120
With Transit Village Development Only: Village Resident EcoPass “ Lite” ...................................................... 121
With Transit Village Development Only: Unbundled, Shared Parking ............................................................ 122
With Transit Village Development Only: Information Booth ............................................................................ 123
11. Tier Three Strategies..................................................................................................................... ............... 125
Internet Kiosks and Free Wi- Fi Service........................................................................................................... 125
With Transit Village Development Only: Attended Bicycle Station.................................................................. 126
With Transit Village Development Only: Village Resident 20- Percent Discount BART Ticket........................ 127
12. Funding........................................................................................................................ .................................. 128
Federal Funding Sources ............................................................................................................................... 128
State and Regional Funding Sources.............................................................................................................. 128
Local Funding Sources........................................................................................................................ ........... 129
13. Proposed Transit Village Development....................................................................................................... 131
Background..................................................................................................................... ................................ 131
Development Objectives..................................................................................................................... ............ 131
Proposed Development ............................................................................................................................... ... 132
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design ( LEED) Neighborhood Design ( ND) Certification ............. 134
The Proposed Development and This Study................................................................................................... 138
Project- Specific Access Recommendations.................................................................................................... 138
Pedestrian Access......................................................................................................................... ................. 138
Transit Access ............................................................................................................................... ................. 144
Bicycle Access......................................................................................................................... ....................... 144
Auto Access......................................................................................................................... ........................... 148
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Access Strategies: Calculations and Assumptions
Appendix B. Review of Applicable Background Documents and Plans
Appendix C. BART Ridership Estimates
Appendix D. 2006 Platform Survey
Appendix E. References
4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2- 1 MacArthur BART Station Location.......................................................................................................... 18
Figure 2- 2 Access Mode Hierarchy...................................................................................................................... ... 21
Figure 3- 1 MacArthur BART Patron Demographics ................................................................................................ 28
Figure 3- 2 MacArthur BART Patron Demographics ( Continued)............................................................................. 29
Figure 3- 3 MacArthur Patron Origins: All Access Modes ........................................................................................ 30
Figure 3- 4 Transit Access Mode Share ................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 4- 1 MacArthur Patron Origins: Walk Access Mode ...................................................................................... 36
Figure 4- 2 City of Oakland Pedestrian Master Plan Pedestrian Route Network Council District 1 ......................... 37
Figure 4- 3 Existing On- Site Pedestrian Facilities..................................................................................................... 39
Figure 4- 4 Location of ADA- Accessible Parking Spaces......................................................................................... 40
Figure 4- 5 Existing Pedestrian Volumes and Designated Routes........................................................................... 41
Figure 5- 1 MacArthur Patron Origins: Transit Access Mode ................................................................................... 44
Figure 5- 2 Transit and Shuttle Facilities at MacArthur BART Station ( May 2006) .................................................. 45
Figure 5- 3 AC Transit Service at Time of Platform Surveys .................................................................................... 48
Figure 5- 4 Current AC Transit Service..................................................................................................................... 49
Figure 5- 5 Existing Shuttle Service ( March 2008) ................................................................................................... 51
Figure 6- 1 MacArthur Patron Origins: Bicycle Access Mode................................................................................... 55
Figure 6- 2 Surrounding Bicycle Facilities................................................................................................................. 57
Figure 6- 3 Proposed Oakland Bikeway Network ..................................................................................................... 58
Figure 6- 4 Existing Station Bicycle Facilities ........................................................................................................... 60
Figure 6- 5 Existing Bicycle Volumes and Designated Routes................................................................................. 62
Figure 7- 1 MacArthur Patron Origins: Dropped- Off Access Mode .......................................................................... 64
Figure 7- 2 MacArthur Patron Origins: Drove Alone Access Mode .......................................................................... 65
Figure 7- 3 Local and Regional Roadway System.................................................................................................... 66
Figure 7- 4 On- Site Circulation System .................................................................................................................... 69
Figure 7- 5 Existing Pick- Up and Drop- Off Facilities ................................................................................................ 70
Figure 7- 6 Current Station Parking Facilities ........................................................................................................... 72
5
Figure 7- 7 Current Off- Site Parking Facilities .......................................................................................................... 74
Figure 9- 1 Proposed Metered and Permit Parking Locations.................................................................................. 84
Figure 9- 2 Drive Alone Access v. Existing AC Transit Bus Routes ......................................................................... 89
Figure 9- 3 Dropped Off Access v. Existing AC Transit Bus Routes ........................................................................ 90
Figure 10- 1 Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Recommendations ........................................................................... 104
Figure 10- 2 Pedestrian- Oriented Retail Links and Transit Corridors..................................................................... 105
Figure 13- 1 Proposed Site Plan........................................................................................................................... . 135
Figure 13- 2 Proposed Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation .................................................................................... 136
Figure 13- 3 Proposed Vehicular Circulation .......................................................................................................... 137
Figure 13- 4 Project- Specific Access Recommendations....................................................................................... 140
6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1- 1 Multi- Modal Access Objectives................................................................................................................. 9
Table 1- 2 Tier One Strategies..................................................................................................................... ............ 11
Table 1- 3 Tier Two Strategies..................................................................................................................... ........... 12
Table 1- 4 Tier Three Strategies .............................................................................................................................. 13
Table 1- 5 Summary of Strategies by Mode ............................................................................................................. 14
Table 2- 1 BART Systemwide Access Mode Share Targets ( AM Peak) .................................................................. 19
Table 2- 2 MacArthur BART Estimated Access Mode Shares ( AM Peak) ............................................................... 20
Table 3- 1 MacArthur BART Train Schedule ............................................................................................................ 25
Table 3- 2 Patron Origin Locations ........................................................................................................................... 31
Table 3- 3 2006 MacArthur BART Station Access Mode Shares ............................................................................. 32
Table 3- 4 comparison of 1998 and 2006 MacArthur BART Station Access Mode Shares ..................................... 33
Table 3- 5 BART Station Typology Access Mode Shares ........................................................................................ 33
Table 3- 6 Target Access Mode Shares ................................................................................................................... 34
Table 5- 1 AC Transit Service Summary ................................................................................................................. 46
Table 5- 2 AC Transit Loads, Boardings and Alightings ( Average Weekday)......................................................... 50
Table 7- 1 Existing Conditions Intersection Level of Service Summary .................................................................. 68
Table 8- 1 Short- Term Targeted Marketing to Patrons: Potential Costs and Benefits ............................................. 78
Table 8- 2 TDM Coordinator: Potential Costs and Benefits...................................................................................... 80
Table 9- 1 Tier One Strategies..................................................................................................................... ............ 81
Table 9- 2 Preferential Spaces for HOVs: Potential Costs and Benefits .................................................................. 83
Table 9- 3 10 Hour Metered Parking: Potential Costs and Benefits ......................................................................... 83
Table 9- 4 Electronic Bicycle Lockers: Potential Costs and Benefits........................................................................ 85
Table 9- 5 Improve AC Transit and Neighborhood/ Hospital Shuttle Access to the Station: Potential Costs and
Benefits ............................................................................................................................... ............................. 91
Table 9- 6 Motorcycle/ Scooter Parking.................................................................................................................... 91
Table 9- 7 Attended Parking: Potential Costs and Benefits...................................................................................... 92
Table 9- 8 Transit Discounts for HOVs: Potential Costs and Benefits...................................................................... 93
Table 9- 9 Wayfinding Signs within the Station Area: Potential Costs and Benefits ................................................ 94
Table 9- 10 Safety Stop: Potential Costs and Benefits............................................................................................. 94
7
Table 9- 11 Wayfinding Signs to/ from Nearby Neighborhoods: Potential Costs and Benefits ................................. 95
Table 9- 12 Station Area Maps: Potential Costs and Benefits.................................................................................. 96
Table 9- 13 Market Rate BART Parking: Potential Costs and Benefits.................................................................... 97
Table 9- 14 Guaranteed Ride Home Program/ Taxi Service: Potential Costs and Benefits .................................... 98
Table 9- 15 Remote Parking: Potential Costs and Benefits...................................................................................... 99
Table 9- 16 Passenger Pick- Up/ Drop- Off Improvements ........................................................................................ 99
Table 9- 17 Station and Village Branding: Potential Costs and Benefits................................................................ 100
Table 9- 18 Carsharing: Potential Costs and Benefits........................................................................................... 101
Table 10- 1 Tier Two Strategies..................................................................................................................... ........ 102
Table 10- 2 Parking Benefit District: Potential Costs and Benefits......................................................................... 103
Table 10- 3 Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements: Potential Costs and Benefits.............................................. 114
Table 10- 4 Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements: Potential Costs and Benefits.................................................... 117
Table 10- 5 High Capacity Bicycle Parking: Potential Costs and Benefits ............................................................ 118
Table 10- 6 Volunteer Neighborhood Guides: Potential Costs and Benefits......................................................... 118
Table 10- 7 Blue Light Phones: Potential Costs and Benefits ............................................................................... 119
Table 10- 8 Neighborhood Ridematching/ Ridesharing: Potential Costs and Benefits ......................................... 120
Table 10- 9 Station/ TDM Website: Potential Costs and Benefits .......................................................................... 120
Table 10- 10 Variable Message Signs: Potential Costs and Benefits ................................................................... 121
Table 10- 11 Village Resident Transit Ecopass Lite: Potential Costs and Benefits............................................... 122
Table 10- 12 Unbundled, Shared Parking: Potential Costs and Benefits ............................................................... 123
Table 10- 13 Information Booth: Potential Costs and Benefits .............................................................................. 124
Table 11- 1 Tier Three Strategies .......................................................................................................................... 125
Table 11- 2 Internet Kiosks and Free Wi- Fi Service: Potential Costs and Benefits............................................... 126
Table 11- 3 Attended Bicycle Station: Potential Costs and Benefits ..................................................................... 126
Table 11- 4 Deep Discount BART Tickets for Village Residents: Potential Costs and Benefits ........................... 127
Table 13- 1 On- Site Intersection Improvements ..................................................................................................... 141
8
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Through an extensive community planning process, the City of Oakland, BART, and the representatives of
residential and business organizations around the MacArthur Station Area have worked to build the necessary
public support for a MacArthur Transit Village and to assist with planning and implementation. After a request for
proposals in 2004, the City of Oakland and the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District ( BART) selected a
development team to work with City of Oakland and BART staff and the surrounding community to plan, design,
construct, and operate a mixed- use project with a residential focus at the MacArthur BART Station. In April 2004,
the development team was selected for the MacArthur Transit Village. The proposed Transit Village Development
is now undergoing environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA). At this critical
time, this Access Study addresses opportunities to re- envision station access in the context of BART’s local and
system- wide long- term plans for the MacArthur BART Station.
This Study has been prepared consistent with policies included in the BART Strategic Plan ( BART 2003) that
address access management. The three primary objectives of this Access Feasibility Study are to:
( 1) Develop a program/ strategies to increase access to the MacArthur BART Station that can be used to
guide capital investments that may be considered in conjunction with or independent of a specific
development project,
( 2) Provide a review of the currently proposed MacArthur Transit Village development related to station
access opportunities, and
( 3) Provide recommendations for the proposed MacArthur Transit Village development
A secondary objective for the MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study is to identify opportunities and
strategies to increase off- peak hour and off- peak direction travel to and from the station. The peak hour
maximum passenger load for trains arriving at the MacArthur BART Station is currently at or above- seated
capacity for the Richmond- Millbrae/ Daly City and Pittsburg/ Bay Point- SF Airport lines. Access strategies that
focus on bringing BART patrons to the station area in the AM peak, and during mid- day, evening, or weekend
periods are important aspects of a targeted and balanced access plan for the MacArthur Station.
PURPOSE
Transit- Oriented Development ( TOD) projects present unique opportunities for promoting and developing
alternative means of travel, as well as access to transit facilities. Historically, BART has found that these
opportunities have not been given equal consideration with roadway improvements during project review. Thus,
BART has begun requiring Access Feasibility Studies be performed in concert with TOD projects. BART believes
that conducting an Access Study in concert with the TOD project can provide the District with sufficient
information to improve the various modes of access to the transit station in general and to help shape the TOD
project specifically. BART- initiated Access Feasibility Studies analyze roadway impacts as well as other modes
of access to BART, such as pedestrian, bicycle, pick- up/ drop- off ( kiss- ride), transit ( both fixed route and privately
operated shuttles), taxis, and high- occupancy vehicles, within a 1/ 4- to 1/ 2- mile radius of a station and the greater
station catchment area. The access improvements identified as a result of the Access Feasibility Study are not
static; once an Access Feasibility Study has been produced, periodic updates of the analysis will need to be
performed to address changing conditions. However, the Access Feasibility Study and its periodic updates will
provide a blueprint for access improvements that can be pursued over time should funds become available.
BACKGROUND
As the BART system has matured and ridership has increased, a number of BART Stations including the
MacArthur Station are experiencing peak period parking access constraints, specifically in the AM peak commute
period ( 6: 00 - 9: 00 AM). In response to increased ridership and parking access constraints, BART staff has
9
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
developed access management policy guidelines that are informed by and consistent with the Board- adopted
BART Strategic Plan ( BART 2003), and has initiated preparing Station Access Feasibility studies to identify
strategies to expand access mode share from non- single occupant vehicles. The Access Feasibility studies are
intended to evaluate all access modes to a given BART Station. BART and its project partners intend to use the
Access Feasibility Study recommendations to guide capital investments to improve and increase station access
capacity, as a stand- alone effort or in conjunction with station area development at a given station. While access
recommendations may be designed to address home- based AM peak period trips, most suggested geometric or
policy changes would benefit all trips to and from the BART Station.
In 2005, the BART Board of Directors adopted a Transit Oriented Development ( TOD) policy that foresaw the
need to treat station access in a more holistic manner to promote the advancement of TOD projects at stations.
The policy addresses the need to make trade- offs between development and replacement parking on a case- by-case
basis, especially in the instances of higher intensity development and where the TOD projects meet other
identified community and regional goals ( MTC TOD Policy).
In 2006, BART completed the Access BART project to develop a strategic assessment of BART station areas and
evaluate trade- offs between TOD opportunities and access investments ( e. g., parking garages, bicycle facilities,
etc.) at a system- and corridor- level, while also considering the known capacity constraints on existing transit
infrastructure. As part of the Access BART project, the MacArthur BART Station was identified as an “ Urban with
Parking” station, which is a station that has high ridership with high walk, bicycle, and transit access shares and a
small parking lot that fills early in the morning. The redevelopment of the station parking lot with a Transit Village
development was identified as an opportunity to re- envision access to the station, by reducing the number of on-site
parking spaces and further increasing the walk, bicycle, and transit access shares. The change would
support BART’s reclassifying the station to an “ Urban Station.” For the MacArthur BART Station, a key challenge
will be balancing multi- modal access needs while shifting to a non- auto access focus. In making this shift, this
study is the first step to move beyond BART property and develop a holistic access strategy for access to BART
from all modes.
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ACCESS OBJECTIVES
This Study includes a chapter on each travel mode, including pedestrian, transit, bicycle, and auto. Each of these
chapters includes a discussion of existing conditions and planned improvements and recommends a set of
access objectives relevant to each mode. The multi- modal access objectives are listed in Table 1- 1.
The modal chapters are arranged according to a modal hierarchy that stresses the importance of non- auto access
to the station.
TABLE 1- 1
MULTI- MODAL ACCESS OBJECTIVES
Pedestrian Access Objectives
- Provide safe, efficient connections between BART fare gates and adjacent streets, including the proposed Telegraph
Avenue Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) service
- Provide safe crossing opportunities, particularly of arterials surrounding the station ( 40th Street, Telegraph Avenue, West
MacArthur Boulevard, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Way)
- Improve pedestrian facilities within a 1/ 2- mile radius of the station to facilitate pedestrian access
- Enhance personal safety for pedestrians to enable the efficacy of non- auto access strategies and incentives
Transit Access Objectives
- Maintain or improve travel times and route directness; Increase transit ( bus/ shuttle) service frequency
- Provide flexible design for bus bays and layover areas to accommodate existing and future demand with a measure of
10
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
flexibility for future changes
- Enhance personal safety for transit patrons
- Minimize transit impacts associated with traffic congestion and drop offs/ pick ups
Bicycle Access Objectives
- Provide safe and efficient connections between bicycle parking locations and adjacent streets, especially with respect to
turns into and out of the station
- Provide safe crossing opportunities
- Support the goals and policies of the City’s broader Bicycle Plan and provide connections to the Oakland, Emeryville,
Piedmont, and Berkeley bicycle networks
- Provide sufficient and secure bicycle parking facilities
- Signalize the intersection of Frontage Road and West MacArthur Boulevard to accommodate left turns
Auto Access Objectives
- Provide efficient but slow- speed vehicle access within the station area
- Provide intuitive wayfinding, including signage to BART and residential parking areas
- Provide sufficient area for existing and expected increasing drop- off and pick- up auto access mode share
- Implement parking management techniques to reduce over- saturation and vehicles “ cruising” for parking within the station
area
􀁸 Provide short- term on- street parking for Transit Village retail
􀁸 Seek opportunities to better manage existing parking resources
Fehr & Peers, March 2008
ACCESS STRATEGIES
A comprehensive menu of access strategies is presented in this study in support of BART’s long- term mode
share and ridership goals for the MacArthur BART Station. These strategies assume a Transit Village
development on the surface parking lot, a reduction in BART patron parking on- site, and a residential parking
permit program ( RPP) in the surrounding residential neighborhoods. However, some of these strategies can be
employed irrespective of the proposed Transit Village project.
Several Tier Zero Strategies, which are strategies that have already been committed to and/ or funded for the
station area, are also presented. Additionally, a short- term Travel Demand Management ( TDM) Coordinator/
Access Strategy Administrator position is discussed as on overall Implementation Strategy. This position is
designed to respond immediately and effectively to changing access needs and to ensure successful
implementation of the other access strategies.
A subsequent tiered set of strategies is recommended to achieve the following two objectives:
1. Addressing ridership and access concerns associated with an expected reduction in on- site parking
supply ( through ridership and parking strategies)
2. Capitalizing on the value of existing and proposed physical infrastructure improvements in terms of their
capacity to facilitate non- auto station access and off- peak hour and direction ridership ( through
transportation demand management ( TDM) and wayfinding strategies)
The parking, transportation demand management, ridership, and wayfinding strategies are classified in three tiers:
􀁸 Tier One Strategies are the most feasible in terms of their ease of implementation and cost- effectiveness
11
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
􀁸 Tier Two Strategies are less feasible because of perceived barriers to implementation and reduced cost-effectiveness.
Many strategies require the support of a TDM Coordinator for administration, funding, or
oversight
􀁸 Tier Three Strategies may or may not be feasible, and are likely not appropriate for short- term
implementation or without further study because of perceived barriers to implementation and/ or poor cost-effectiveness
The recommended strategies are summarized in Tables 1- 2, 1- 3, and 1- 4 below. The tables also summarize the
costs and benefits for each tier of strategies. Appendices A and C provide details on the derivation of the
ridership estimates, capital costs, and operating costs as summarized in these tables.
TABLE 1- 2 TIER ONE STRATEGIES
Tier One Strategy Daily Ridership
Benefit Capital Cost 10- Year
Operating Cost
Preferential Parking for Carpool/ Vanpool in the BART
Lot/ Garage 60 $ 5,000 $ 0
10- Hour Metered Parking on 40th Street and West MacArthur
Boulevard 80 $ 30,000 ($ 500,000)
Electronic Bicycle Lockers in the BART Plaza insufficient data to
support estimate $ 45,000 $ 50,000
AC Transit and Emery- Go- Round Access Improvements,
including shelters, real- time bus information, and express
service 100 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,800,000
Hospital Shuttles Access Improvements with new traffic
signal at Frontage Road and West MacArthur Boulevard 150 $ 250,000 $ 80,000
Expanded Motorcycle and Scooter Parking in the BART
Parking Lot/ Garage 24 $ 1,000 $ 0
Attended Parking in the BART Parking Lot/ Garage 150 $ 75,000 $ 1,500,000
Carpool and Vanpool Transit Discounts for BART patrons supporting
strategy $ 50,000 $ 250,000
Wayfinding Signs within the Station Area to encourage non-auto
access and off- peak/ direction travel
supporting
strategy $ 40,000 $ 10,000
Safety Stop to accommodate bus and shuttle patrons with on-demand
stops during nighttime service
supporting
strategy $ 0 $ 0
Wayfinding Signs to/ from the Station in Nearby
Neighborhoods to encourage non- auto access and off-peak/
direction travel
supporting
strategy $ 60,000 $ 10,000
Station Area Maps to improve wayfinding, encourage non-auto
access and off- peak/ direction travel
supporting
strategy $ 25,000 $ 16,000
Market Rate BART Parking in the BART Parking Lot/ Garage supporting
strategy $ 0 ($ 4,500,000)
Guaranteed Ride Home Program ( ride insurance) marketing
to increase usage of current Bay Area programs; Enhanced as
a Supplemental Guaranteed Ride Home Program for BART
patrons not eligible for current programs ( with a Transit Village
development)
supporting
strategy $ 10,000 $ 82,000
With a Transit Village Development Only:
12
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Remote Parking at three local churches 200 $ 25,000 $ 200,000
Passenger Drop- Off Improvements to reduce conflicts
between shuttles, autos, bicyclists, and pedestrians
supporting
strategy $ 20,000 $ 20,000
Station and Village Branding, including street furniture,
signage, lighting, etc.
supporting
strategy $ 150,000 $ 200,000
Car Sharing opportunities for Transit Village residents and
employees
supporting
strategy $ 0 $ 300,000
Source: Fehr & Peers, March 2008
TABLE 1- 3
TIER TWO STRATEGIES
Tier Two Strategy Ridership Benefit Capital Cost 10- Year
Operating Cost
Parking Benefit District to enable BART patrons to purchase
surplus Residential Parking Permits ( RPPs) with revenues
dedicated to the District 400 $ 25,000 ($ 1,920,000)
Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements on surrounding
pedestrian access routes
insufficient data to
support estimate $ 5,000,000 $ 500,000
Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements on surrounding bicycle
access routes
insufficient data to
support estimate $ 500,000 $ 250,000
High Capacity Bicycle Parking on the BART Plaza insufficient data to
support estimate $ 100,000 $ 50,000
Volunteer Neighborhood Guides to guide visitors to the
station area and Village
supporting
strategy $ 100,000 $ 1,000,000
Blue Light Phones/ Personal Security Improvements to
encourage non- auto travel within the station area
supporting
strategy $ 70,000 $ 70,000
Neighborhood Ridematching/ Ridesharing ( promote existing
511 service with potential expansion)
supporting
strategy $ 5,000 $ 50,000
Station/ TDM Website to enhance wayfinding, non- auto access
alternatives
supporting
strategy $ 10,000 $ 50,000
Smart Parking ( Variable Message Signs) to alert patrons to
available parking capacity in the BART Parking Lot/ Garage
supporting
strategy $ 35,000 $ 35,000
With Transit Village Development Only:
Village Resident EcoPass “ Lite” ( BART EZ Rider discounts
through MTC Pilot Program) to encourage car shedding 12 $ 5,000 ($ 54,200)
Unbundled, shared parking for new residential development
to make additional parking capacity available for BART patrons 180 $ 10,000 $ 100,000
Information Booth to be located in the Transit Village supporting
strategy $ 50,000 $ 250,000
Source: Fehr & Peers, March 2008
13
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
TABLE 1- 4
TIER THREE STRATEGIES
Tier Three Strategy Ridership Benefit Capital Cost 10- Year
Operating Cost
Free Wi- Fi to enable Internet access for wayfinding information supporting
strategy $ 25,000 $ 100,000
Internet Kiosks to provide wayfinding information supporting
strategy $ 10,000 $ 100,000
With Transit Village Development Only:
Bicycle Station co- located with a retail use in the Transit
Village
insufficient data to
support estimate $ 650,000 $ 1,500,000
Village Resident BART EcoPass ( deep discount) to
encourage car shedding 40 $ 5,000 $ 1,280,000
Source: Fehr & Peers, March 2008
14
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Table 1- 5 summaries the above strategies by mode, tier, and 10- year cost/ ridership benefit.
TABLE 1- 5 SUMMARY OF STRATEGIES BY MODE
Strategy Mode Tier 10- Year Cost/
Ridership
Preferential Parking for Carpool/ Vanpool Auto One $ 83
10- Hour Metered Parking Auto One ($ 5,875)
Attended Parking Auto One $ 10,500
Carpool and Vanpool Transit Discounts Auto One N/ A
Market Rate BART Parking Auto One N/ A
Remote Parking Auto One $ 1,125
Passenger Drop- Off Improvements Auto One N/ A
Car Sharing Auto One N/ A
Parking Benefit District Auto Two ($ 4,738)
Neighborhood Ridematching/ Ridesharing Auto Two N/ A
Smart Parking ( Variable Message Signs) Auto Two N/ A
Unbundled, shared parking Auto Two $ 611
Electronic Bicycle Lockers Bicycle One N/ A
Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements Bicycle Two N/ A
High Capacity Bicycle Parking Bicycle Two N/ A
Bicycle Station Bicycle Three N/ A
Expanded Motorcycle and Scooter Parking Motorcycle/
Scooter One $ 42
15
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
TABLE 1- 5 SUMMARY OF STRATEGIES BY MODE
Wayfinding Signs within the Station Area Multi- modal One N/ A
Wayfinding Signs to/ from the Station in Nearby Neighborhoods Multi- modal One N/ A
Station Area Maps Multi- modal One N/ A
Guaranteed Ride Home Program Multi- modal One N/ A
Station and Village Branding Multi- modal One N/ A
Blue Light Phones/ Personal Security Improvements Multi- modal Two N/ A
Station/ TDM Website Multi- modal Two N/ A
Information Booth Multi- modal Two N/ A
Free Wi- Fi Multi- modal Three N/ A
Internet Kiosks Multi- modal Three N/ A
Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements Pedestrian Two N/ A
Volunteer Neighborhood Guides Pedestrian Two N/ A
AC Transit and Emery- Go- Round Access Improvements Transit One $ 28,000
Hospital Shuttles Access Improvements Transit One $ 2,200
Safety Stop Transit One N/ A
Village Resident EcoPass “ Lite” Transit Two ($ 4,517)
Village Resident BART EcoPass Transit Three $ 42,600
Source: Fehr & Peers, April 2008
16
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
FUNDING SOURCES
Chapter 12 presents a summary of candidate federal, state, regional, and local funding sources that may be
available in support of the recommended access strategies. It is important to note that most transit- oriented
development ( TOD) projects require multiple funding sources. It is likely that the recommended access
strategies, in addition to the many other aspects of the proposed Transit Village, will also require multiple funding
sources. Additionally, most funding sources are not specifically targeted for TODs, but rather for elements that
may be included in a TOD, such as air quality improvement. Because funds are not earmarked for TODs, they
may require TOD projects to compete for funds, adding a further challenge to obtaining funding.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED ACCESS RECOMMENDATIONS
The study concludes with a summary of the current development proposal for the MacArthur Transit Village. The
proposed development includes five new buildings that will accommodate up to 675 for- rent and for- sale
residential units, and up to 49,000 square feet of neighborhood- serving retail and commercial uses, live/ work
units, and a community center use. Approximately 1,000 parking spaces, including 300 BART patron spaces, are
also proposed in structured facilities. New land uses in the project area would be consistent with the land uses
prescribed in the S- 15, Transit- Oriented Development Zone. The project also includes two new internal
roadways, landscaping and other streetscape improvements ( i. e., benches and street lighting), and improvements
to the BART Plaza. The proposed development is expected to receive a Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design – Neighborhood Development ( LEED- ND) Stage One Gold certification as a sustainable neighborhood
development project.
The new development project would attract new BART riders because many of the new project residents would
ride BART for work, shopping, and recreation trips and because the project would provide enhanced access to
the station for pedestrians, bikers, transit and shuttle users, and kiss and ride users. Nonetheless, BART is
concerned that the loss of patron parking spaces at or near the station could result in an overall reduction in
BART ridership.
Chapter 13 presents project- specific access recommendations related to the proposed development, which
responds to this concern by examining a full spectrum of multi- modal access strategies for the MacArthur station
that could be implemented to improve existing conditions and to provide attractive access options to those
patrons who may be affected by the reduced on- site parking. BART will consider these options in its long- term
plan for improving access to the site. BART intends to use the study to work with the developer and the City of
Oakland to determine which of the strategies are feasible and should be implemented by BART or others. The
City of Oakland and BART have not yet finalized the improvements that will be conditions of development
approval.
17
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
2. INTRODUCTION
Through an extensive community planning process, the City of Oakland, BART, and the representatives of
residential and business organizations around the MacArthur Station Area ( Figure 2- 1) have worked to build the
necessary public support for a MacArthur Transit Village and to assist with planning and implementation. An
important aspect of the planning and implementation work is the development of an Access Feasibility Study for
the MacArthur BART Station. Station Access Feasibility studies are required by BART to correspond with
planned changes to a Station Area. The Access Feasibility Study process provides a key opportunity to re-envision
station access in the context of BART’s local and system- wide long- term plans for a station.
This Access Feasibility Study has been prepared consistent with policies included in the BART Strategic Plan
( BART 2003) that address access management. The three primary objectives of this Access Feasibility are to:
( 1) Develop a program/ strategies to increase access to the MacArthur BART Station that can be used to
guide capital investments that may be considered in conjunction with or independent of a specific
development project,
( 2) Provide a review of the currently proposed MacArthur Transit Village development related to station
access opportunities, and
( 3) Provide recommendations for the proposed MacArthur Transit Village development that relate to station
access opportunities
A secondary objective for the MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study is to identify opportunities and
strategies to increase off- peak hour and off- peak direction travel to and from the station. The peak hour
maximum passenger load for trains arriving at the MacArthur BART Station ( after boarding and alighting) range
from moderate ridership levels for the Fremont- Richmond line to near- or above- seated capacity for the
Richmond- Millbrae/ Daly City and Pittsburg/ Bay Point- SF Airport lines. Trains to SF Airport and Millbrae use a mix
of nine and 10- car trains during peak hours, while the Richmond/ Fremont lines have six- to eight- car trains during
peak hours. Access strategies, which focus on bringing BART patrons to the Station Area in the AM peak, and
during mid- day, evening, or weekend periods are important aspects of a targeted and balanced access plan for
the MacArthur Station.
Access refers to the portion of BART riders’ trips between their origin or destination and the station faregates. A
typical BART rider’s trip may include multiple transportation modes, such as home- drive- BART- walk- work or
home- shuttle- BART- bus- work. This Access Feasibility Study will provide short- and long- term solutions to key
access issues for all users of the MacArthur BART Station including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and shuttle
and bus patrons. Improving access to the MacArthur BART Station is critical to meeting ridership goals and
serving customer needs, across all modes.
The following provides an overview of the context for this Study and its organization.
BACKGROUND/ RELEVANT BART POLICIES
As the BART system has matured and ridership has increased, a number of BART Stations including the
MacArthur Station are experiencing peak period parking access constraints, specifically in the AM peak commute
period ( 6: 00 - 9: 00 AM). In response to increased ridership and parking access constraints, BART staff has
developed access management policies that are informed by and consistent with the BART Board- adopted BART
Strategic Plan ( BART 2003) and has initiated preparing Station Access Feasibility studies to identify strategies to
expand access mode share from non- single occupant vehicles. The Access Feasibility studies are intended to
evaluate all access modes to a given BART Station.
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 2- 1 FIGURE 2- 1
MACARTHUR BART STATION LOCATION
Emeryville
Berkeley
W. MACARTHUR BLVD.
HOLLIS ST.
32ND ST.
HORTON ST.
CHRISTIE
AVE.
SHELLMOUND AVE.
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
MacArthur
BART Station
West
Oakland 12th Street
19th Street
Rockridge
Ashby
Lake
Merritt
19
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
BART and its project partners intend to use the Access Feasibility Study recommendations to guide capital
investments to improve and increase station access capacity, as a stand- alone effort or in conjunction with station
area development at a given station. While access recommendations may be designed to address home- based
AM peak period trips, any suggested geometric or policy changes would benefit all trips to and from the BART
Station.
In 2005, the BART Board of Directors adopted a Transit Oriented Development ( TOD) policy that foresaw the
need to treat station access in a more holistic manner to promote the advancement of TOD projects at stations.
The policy addresses the need to make tradeoffs between development and replacement parking on a case- by-case
basis, especially in the instances of higher intensity development and where the TOD projects meet other
identified community and regional goals ( MTC TOD Policy).
System- wide Access Mode Targets
In support of the Station Access Feasibility studies, the BART Board of Directors considered targets for individual
access modes as part of the Access Management and Improvement Policy Framework ( BART 2000). The
targets are intended to reduce the share of drive alone personal vehicles while increasing access via walking,
bicycling, transit, carpool, passenger drop- off, and taxis. While station- specific targets were not developed for the
2000 study, system- wide targets were developed based on expected ridership increases, BART’s ability to
influence future access modes, and access mode share information from BART’s 1998 Ridership Profile Survey
( BART 1999). The 1998 mode share and 2010 targets are shown in Table 2- 1.
TABLE 2- 1
BART SYSTEMWIDE ACCESS MODE SHARE TARGETS ( AM PEAK)
Access Mode 1998 Mode Share 2010 Targets
Walk 23.0% 24.5%
Transit 21.0% 22.0%
Bicycle 2.0% 3.0%
Drop- Off, Carpool, Taxi 16.0% 19.5%
Drive Alone 38.0% 31.0%
Source: BART, 2000.
MacArthur BART Station Access Mode Targets
As part of the recent Access BART project ( BART 2006), BART categorized all of the system stations into five
different types based on an access typology matrix using the following metrics:
􀁸 Daily ridership
􀁸 Station footprint size
􀁸 Surrounding street network
􀁸 Proximity to freeway off- ramps
􀁸 Parking capacity
20
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
􀁸 Parking fill time
􀁸 Transit service type
􀁸 Number of buses per hour
􀁸 Number of bus bays
􀁸 Walk access share
􀁸 MTC regional hub location
The MacArthur BART Station was identified as an “ Urban with Parking” Station, which is a Station that has high
ridership with high walk, bicycle, and transit access shares and a small parking lot that fills early in the morning.
Other stations in this category include Ashby, North Berkeley, and Lake Merritt in the East Bay.
In addition to classifying the different stations, the project also estimated the 2005 and 2030 access mode shares
for the system based on ridership forecasting models that predict changes in BART boardings and alightings via
auto, transit, and walk access given ridership, parking access, feeder bus levels, and localized land use data.
As shown in Table 2- 2, BART anticipates a four percent access mode shift from driving to walking and bicycling
between 2005 and 2030 at the MacArthur BART Station with current trends. With this forecast, MacArthur Station
would remain an Urban with Parking Station in 2030. In order to advance its Strategic Plan goals and the Board-adopted
TOD Policy, BART is considering advancing development and alternative access modes ( walk, bike,
transit, passenger drop- off) at the MacArthur BART Station, which may lead to a reduction in the number of on-site
parking spaces at the station.
TABLE 2- 2
MACARTHUR BART ESTIMATED ACCESS MODE SHARES ( AM PEAK)
Access Mode 2005 Estimated
Mode Share1
2030 Estimated
Mode Share
2030 Urban Station
Mode Share Range
Walk & Bicycle 27.0% 31.0% 52- 58%
Transit 33.0% 33.0% 32- 38%
Drive Alone, Drop- Off,
Carpool & Taxi 41.0% 36.0% 6- 12%
Source: BART, 2006.
1 Note that 2005 estimates ( based on 1998 data) are different from 2006 survey results
reported in this study. Mode share changes from 1998 to 2006 are discussed in Chapter
Three.
A successful development project would help to promote the station to be classified as an Urban Station in the
future. Additionally, a well- developed access plan with short and long- range strategies will be critical for meeting
these goals.
Increasing Off- Peak Travel to/ from MacArthur Station
Another important goal is to identify opportunities and strategies to increase off- peak travel and travel during peak
periods in the non- peak direction to and from the MacArthur BART Station. During peak hours, BART lines
serving MacArthur Station destined for San Francisco currently operate with heavy passenger loads. During peak
hours ample capacity for additional passengers is available on trains headed to Pittsburg- Bay Point, Fremont, and
21
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Richmond and in all directions during off- peak hours. Access strategies are needed that focus not just on peak
access to the station, but also providing access during the mid- day, evening and weekend periods for BART
patrons to destinations in the station area. Strategies that improve the last mile connection and attract mid- day
trips, such as improved station area wayfinding, marketing of access improvements, and enhanced bus or shuttle
connections to employment centers in Emeryville and Oakland will be important aspects of a targeted and
balanced access plan for the MacArthur Station.
REPORT ORGANIZATION
This Access Feasibility Study focuses on balancing the access needs of the BART Station users and those of
private development. In doing so, this study relies on BART’s Access Hierarchy and identifies incremental
strategies that will enable a long- range, sustainable shift to non- auto station access modes.
Access Hierarchy
BART Station Access Guidelines include an Access Hierarchy, a tool to help resolve competing demands for
funding and physical space between different access modes ( BART 2003). The modal sections in this study are
organized using the Access Hierarchy, as illustrated in Figure 2- 2. The hierarchy stresses the walking, transit,
and bicycle access modes for their current importance and especially for their projected role in enhancing multi-modal
access to the Station Area.
Contents
The Access Feasibility Study is divided into the following chapters:
􀁸 Chapter 1 – Executive Summary
􀁸 Chapter 2 – Introduction
􀁸 Chapter 3 – Setting and Access Considerations
􀁸 Chapter 4 – Pedestrian Access
􀁸 Chapter 5 – Transit Access
􀁸 Chapter 6 – Bicycle Access
􀁸 Chapter 7 – Auto Access
􀁸 Chapter 8 – Overview of Access Strategies
􀁸 Chapter 9 – Tier One Strategies
􀁸 Chapter 10 – Tier Two Strategies
􀁸 Chapter 11 – Tier Three Strategies
􀁸 Chapter 12 – Funding
􀁸 Chapter 13 – Proposed Development
Chapters 4- 7 include a discussion of existing conditions and a set of access objectives related to the needs
identified for each mode.
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Drat Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 2- 2
ACCESS MODE HIERARCHY
FIGURE 2- 2
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
23
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Chapters 8- 11, Tiered Strategies, are the most critical components of the Access Feasibility Study. Strategies
presented in these chapters illustrate a three- tiered approach of access policies and programs.
Chapter 12 presents a summary of candidate funding sources, which may be available in support of the
recommended strategies.
Although the MacArthur Transit Village development project highlighted the need to evaluate access conditions at
the MacArthur BART station, many of the conditions described and recommendations included in this study
address existing access conditions that could be improved unrelated to the implementation of the project. The
final chapter, Chapter 13, summarizes the current Transit Village development proposal and presents additional
project- specific access recommendations.
24
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
3. SETTING AND ACCESS CONSIDERATIONS
OVERVIEW
The MacArthur BART Station is an elevated station located at 555 40th Street, in the Highway 24 freeway median
in Oakland, California. The MacArthur BART Station Area is located at the geographic center of the Bay Area
and occupies a central location in northern Alameda County within the City of Oakland. Opened in 1972 adjacent
to a 7- acre parking lot, the station has four platforms and serves as a timed transfer facility for trains on the
Richmond- Fremont, Richmond- Daly City/ Millbrae and Pittsburg/ Bay Point- San Francisco International Airport
lines.
Bounded by 40th Street to the north, West
MacArthur Boulevard to the south,
Telegraph Avenue to the east, and Martin
Luther King, Jr. ( MLK) Way to the west,
the MacArthur BART Station is also
surrounded by I- 580 and Highway 24,
which provide auto access throughout the
Bay Area.
The area surrounding the station is a mix
of relatively low- medium density residential
and commercial land uses, with
commercial uses lining the major streets.
The station is located within a short
distance to downtown Oakland, the
Temescal and Piedmont commercial
districts, the San Francisco- Oakland Bay
Bridge, and shopping developments in
Emeryville.
MacArthur BART Station Faregate Plaza
BART TRAIN SERVICES
The MacArthur BART Station is the central hub and transfer point of the entire BART system. Approximately 430
trains per day pass through the station providing quick and efficient service to many parts of the Bay Area,
including downtown Oakland ( 3 minutes), downtown San Francisco ( 16 minutes) and the San Francisco
International Airport ( 54 minutes).
During weekday peak commute periods, patrons at the MacArthur BART Station can directly access all other
BART stations except Castro Valley and Dublin/ Pleasanton. Access to these stations requires a transfer at the
Bay Fair Station.
As shown in Table 3- 1, the MacArthur BART Station provides service from 4: 00 AM to 1: 30 AM on weekdays with
typical headways of 15 minutes on each line serving the station during peak and mid- day hours and 20 minute
headways in the evening after 8: 00 PM, and 6: 15 AM ( 8: 03 AM on Sundays) to 12: 45 AM on weekends with
typical headways of 20 minutes. During the weekday AM peak commute period ( 6: 00 AM to 9: 00 AM), headways
toward San Francisco range from 2 to 7 minutes.
25
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
TABLE 3- 1
MACARTHUR BART TRAIN SCHEDULE
Line Headway ( Minutes)
Weekday Weekend
Origin Destination
AM
Commute
Period ( WB)
PM
Commute
Period ( EB)
Daily
Saturday
( Daily)
Sunday
( Daily)
Richmond Millbrae 15 15 15 No
Service No Service
Millbrae Richmond 15 15 15 No
Service No Service
Richmond Daly City n/ a n/ a No Service 20 No Service
Daly City Richmond n/ a n/ a No Service 20 No Service
Richmond Fremont 15 15 15 20
( 15 after 7 pm) 15
Fremont Richmond 15 15 15 20
( 15 after 7 pm) 15
Pittsburg/ Bay Point San Francisco
Airport 7 7 15 20
( 15 after 7 pm) 15
San Francisco
Airport Pittsburg/ Bay Point 7 7 15 20
( 15 after 7 pm) 15
Source: BART and Fehr & Peers, 2008.
ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS SURROUNDING THE BART STATION
The immediate ½ - mile area surrounding the MacArthur BART Station includes a diverse mix of land uses,
including commercial, industrial, institutional, public, residential, and vacant properties. There are a wide variety
of land uses that serve as origins and destinations for BART patrons.
Most of the residential land uses surrounding the station are low- medium density, including single- family
residences and duplexes, with some multi- unit apartment buildings. There are also a number of major
destinations easily accessible from the MacArthur BART Station, including:
􀁸 Temescal shopping district – 0.50 mile to the north
􀁸 Oakland Children’s Hospital – 0.60 mile to the north
􀁸 Summit Medical Center – 0.65 mile to the south
􀁸 Kaiser Permanente Medical Center – 0.60 mile to the southeast
􀁸 Piedmont shopping district – 0.75 mile to the east
􀁸 Emeryville commercial shopping district – 1.4 miles to the west
26
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Based on the 1998 BART Station Profile Survey ( BART 1999), the primary market catchment area, which
describes the area and population from which a particular station attracts patrons, includes Emeryville, portions of
south Berkeley, Piedmont, and portions of north and east Oakland.
Based on data from Census 2000 ( US
Census Bureau 2000), there are
approximately 114,250 people living
within the MacArthur BART Station
catchment area. According to ABAG
projections, there will be approximately
147,450 people living within the
MacArthur BART Station catchment
area in 2030, a 29 percent increase.
The following sections describe the
characteristics of the patrons in terms
of commute pattern and mode of
access.
BART RIDERSHIP
The average number of patrons with
trips originating at the MacArthur
BART Station in May 2006 was
approximately 2,150 during the
morning peak period ( 7: 00 to 10: 00
AM), and approximately 1,722 during
the evening peak period ( 4: 00 to 7: 00
PM). There were approximately 6,740
total daily boardings at this station in May 2006, making it the 16th highest ridership station on the 43 station
BART system.
The peak hour maximum passenger load for trains arriving at the MacArthur BART Station ( after boarding and
alighting) range from moderate ridership levels for the Fremont- Richmond line to near- or above- seated capacity
for the Richmond- Millbrae/ Daly City and Pittsburg/ Bay Point- SF Airport lines. Trains to SF Airport and Millbrae
use a mix of nine and 10- car trains during peak hours, while the Richmond/ Fremont lines have six- to eight- car
trains during peak hours.
Because of its important role as a transfer station, as well as the growing number of employment and retail
destinations accessible from the station ( especially via the Emery- Go- Round shuttle), MacArthur BART Station
functions as both a production and, increasingly, an attraction station. As noted, increasing the off peak
hour/ direction ridership to/ from the station is a goal for this Access Feasibility Study because of the peak capacity
constraints in the system.
Future Ridership Projections
The Strategic Station Assessments component of the Access BART project included ridership forecasts for the
MacArthur BART Station in 2030 ( BART, 2006). The forecasts projected an increase in daily boardings to 7,118
under a transit oriented development ( TOD) scenario, with selective changes to station area parking and bus
service in support of higher intensity, transit- supportive land uses. The forecasts projected an increase to 7,851
daily boardings if BART extensions to San Jose, eBART to Byron, the Oakland Airport Connector, the Dumbarton
Rail Project, and Amtrak Capitol Corridor improvement projects are in place.
Typical surrounding neighborhood low- medium density
residential land use
27
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
The Access BART estimates reflect a conservative view of BART ridership growth and do not account for
increases in fuel costs or other economic changes that could increase ridership. For instance, MacArthur BART
average weekday daily exits were 7,582 for the quarter ending December 2007, which is higher than the Access
BART 2030 forecast.
Ridership levels are expected to continue to increase with the proposed Transit Village Development, as well as
significant residential and commercial development in the station catchment area. Growth in the station area will
also affect traffic and transit conditions and BART patron access mode shares. The recommended access
strategies in this study respond to the existing conditions in the area but also anticipate the growing and changing
needs associated with increased BART ridership at MacArthur Station.
Patron Demographics
Based on the daily summary for platform intercept surveys of BART riders arriving at MacArthur BART Station,
the following behaviors and demographics describe typical riders:
􀁸 6% of MacArthur BART riders are younger than 20 years old, 31% are between 21 and 30 years old, 27%
are between 31 and 40 years old, 16% are between 41 and 50 years old, and 14% are between 51- 59
years old, and 6% are older than 60
􀁸 56% of MacArthur BART riders identify themselves as minorities, including 30% Black/ African American,
13% Asian/ Pacific Islander, 10% Spanish/ Hispanic/ Latino, and 3% Other
􀁸 72% of MacArthur BART riders use BART three or more days a week, 13% use BART one or two days a
week, 8% use BART one to three days a month, and 7% use BART less than one day a month
􀁸 66% of MacArthur BART riders originate in Oakland, 25% originate in Emeryville, and 9% originate in
Berkeley/ Piedmont/ Other
􀁸 37% of MacArthur BART riders have destinations within San Francisco, 12% have destinations within
Oakland, 10% have destinations within Berkeley, and 41% have destinations within the rest of the Bay
Area
􀁸 59% of MacArthur BART riders use BART to commute to and from work, 10% use BART to commute to
and from school, and 31% use BART to commute to and from personal business, shopping, recreation, or
other
Figures 3- 1 and 3- 2 present graphical summaries of patron demographics.
Patron Origin Locations
Data from the access mode survey was geo- coded and plotted to produce maps that show the various MacArthur
BART patron origins by access mode. These maps have been placed within the subsequent modal chapters. As
shown in Table 3- 2 and Figure 3- 3, almost all ( 88%) of the MacArthur BART patrons originate their trips within two
miles of the Station. This may explain why the existing walk, bicycle, and transit access mode shares at
MacArthur are higher than the BART system averages ( which include end- of- the- line stations with very large
catchment areas).
28
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Figure 3- 1 MacArthur BART Patron Demographics
younger than 20
6%
21- 30
31%
31- 40
27%
41- 50
16%
51- 59
14%
older than 60
6%
3+ days/ week
72%
1- 2 days/ week
13%
3 days/ month
8%
< 1 day/ month
7%
White
44%
Black/ African
American
30%
Asian/ Pacific
Islander
13%
Spanish/
Hispanic/ Latino
10%
Other
3%
Patron Age Patron Race/ Ethnicity
Frequency of Use
29
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Figure 3- 2 MacArthur BART Patron Demographics ( Continued)
Oakland
66%
Emeryville
25%
Berkeley/
Piedmont/ Other
9%
San Francisco
37%
Oakland
Berkeley 12%
10%
Other Bay Area
41%
Commute to/ from
Work
59%
Commute to/ from
School
10%
Personal Business/
Recreation/
Shopping
31%
Place of Origin Destination
Trip Purpose
ASHBY
MACARTHUR
ROCKRIDGE
12TH STREET
19TH STREET
LAKE MERRITT
WEST OAKLAND
GIS Data Source: MTC, City of Oakland, Census2000, ESRI, BART, AC Transit
Location: Oakland, CA
Trip Survey by Corey, Canapari and Galanis Research 2006
0 0.5 1
Miles
Patrons per Origin Location
1
2 - 5
6 - 10
11 - 20
21 - 36
BART Station
BART
AC Transit
All Modes to MacArthur BART Station - Trip Origin Locations
26.3%
14.3%
59.8%
73.2%
88.0%
Percent of Trip Origins
within Buffers - All Modes
1/ 2 mile
1 mile
1.5 mile
2 mile
1/ 4 mile
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 3- 4 FIGURE 3- 3
MACARTHUR BART STATION PATRON ORIGINS -
ALL ACCESS MODES
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
31
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Emery- Go- Round
52%
AC Transit
25%
Kaiser Hopital
13%
Children's Hospital
4%
Alta Bates Summit
Hospital
6%
TABLE 3- 2
PATRON ORIGIN LOCATIONS
Distance
Access Mode <= 0.25
Mile
0.26- 0.50
Mile
0.51- 1.00
Mile
1.01- 1.50
Miles
1.51- 2.00
Miles
> 2.00
Miles
Row
Total
Walk 32.5% 25.5% 31.5% 4.9% 1.1% 4.5% 100%
Transit 3.4% 2.1% 35.6% 19.9% 28.6% 10.4% 100%
Bicycle 18.5% 15.3% 41.6% 9.2% 7.7% 7.7% 100%
Drop- Off, Carpool, Taxi 2.6% 11.4% 36.9% 11.4% 11.4% 26.3% 100%
Drive Alone 8.7% 3.9% 25.3% 20.4% 18.4% 23.3% 100%
Column Total 14.3% 12.0% 33.5% 13.4% 14.8% 12.0% 100%
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2006.
Geographic Information System ( GIS) analysis of driver origin information and existing transit routes
demonstrates that the majority of drive alone access trips originate from within ¼ - mile buffers of AC Transit lines
or shuttles directly serving the MacArthur BART Station. Thus, these drive alone trips are likely occurring
because parking is cheap or free at/ near the Station or the bus service is inconvenient, unreliable, etc. Most
patrons who are dropped off at the Station also originate from within ¼ - mile buffers of AC Transit lines or shuttles.
As shown in Table 3- 2, more than 1/ 3 of drive alone access trips originate from within one mile of the station and
more than 2/ 3 originate within two miles. An analysis of monthly parking permit holders’ home addresses
suggests that permit holders tend to originate farther from the station, but almost 1/ 2 live within two miles.
Access Mode Shares
Based on MacArthur BART Station platform intercept
surveys, patron mode of access data was compiled
for the AM peak period, mid- day period, and PM peak
period, as shown in Table 3- 3. When compared to
the system- wide all- day access mode shares, patrons
who access the MacArthur BART Station utilize
personal vehicles much less than typical BART
patrons. As shown in Figure 3- 3, further analysis of
the access mode data shows that of the patrons who
took transit to the MacArthur BART Station, 52% used
Emery- Go- Round, 25% used AC Transit, 13% used
the Kaiser Hospital Shuttle, 4% used the Children’s
Hospital Shuttle, and 6% used the Alta Bates Summit
Hospital Shuttle.
The 2006 survey illustrates significant changes in
access modes to the MacArthur Station since the last
survey in 1998, as shown in Table 3- 4.
Figure 3- 4 2006 Transit Access Mode Share
32
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
The 2006 bicycle mode share ( AM peak) represents a significant increase ( more than 100%) in bicycle access to
the station since 1998. This increase is likely the result of changing demographics in the neighborhoods
surrounding the station, especially the Temescal neighborhood, where many young professionals now live. 1
Additionally, bicycles are no longer allowed in the 19th Street BART Station during peak travel periods, which may
have caused cyclists to shift to the MacArthur BART Station. Finally, the City of Oakland has expanded its bicycle
network over the past decade, and bicycling has increased throughout the City. As demographic changes and
bicycle accommodations continue in this area, there will likely be a further increase in the bicycle access mode
share.
Walking and transit access to the station have also increased since 1998, by 26% and 30% in the AM peak
period, respectively. The increase in walking mode share is also likely related to demographic changes as well as
new transit- oriented residential developments in the station area. The increase in transit access is most likely
associated with the growing popularity of the Emery- Go- Round shuttle, as well as new employment and
residential developments in Emeryville.
Correspondingly, auto access to the station in the AM peak period has decreased by almost 35% since 1998.
TABLE 3- 3
2006 MACARTHUR BART STATION ACCESS MODE SHARES
Access Mode AM Peak Period Mid- day Period PM Peak Period Daily
Walk 34% 33% 22% 29%
Transit 26% 37% 57% 39%
Bicycle 8% 7% 5% 7%
Drop- Off & Taxi 14% 12% 11% 15%
Carpool 1% < 1% < 1% < 1%
Drive Alone 17% 11% 5% 10%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2006.
1 Census Tract 4011, which includes the MacArthur BART Station, saw an 80% increase in residents age 25 to 44 from 1990 to
2000, with a corresponding loss in residents in every other age cohort.
33
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
TABLE 3- 4
COMPARISON OF 1998 AND 2006 MACARTHUR BART STATION ACCESS MODE SHARES
Access Mode AM Peak
Period ( 1998)
AM Peak
Period ( 2006)
AM Peak Period
% Change
1998 to 2006
Daily
( 1998)
Daily
( 2006)
Daily % Change
1998 to 2006
Walk or Bicycle 31% 42% 35% 26% 36% 35%
Walk 27% 34% 26%
Bicycle 4% 8% 100%
Transit 20% 26% 30% 33% 39% 19%
Auto 49% 32% - 35% 41% 25% - 38%
Drive Alone 42% 16% - 62%
Drop- Off, Carpool, Taxi 7% 16% 129%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: BART Station Profile Study, 1998 and Fehr & Peers, 2006.
As noted in Chapter Two, the MacArthur BART Station is classified as an “ Urban with Parking” Station based on
the Access BART Station typologies. As shown in Table 3- 5, the MacArthur BART Station AM peak period walk,
bicycle, and transit access mode shares now exceed the “ Urban with Parking” Station type range, while the daily
walk and bicycle access mode shares fall below the “ Urban with Parking” Station type range. The percentage of
patrons accessing the station by auto is below both the AM Peak and Daily ranges.
TABLE 3- 5
BART STATION TYPOLOGY ACCESS MODE SHARES
AM Peak Period Daily
Access Mode “ Urban with Parking”
Station Type Ranges
MacArthur BART
Station – 2006
“ Urban with Parking”
Station Type Ranges
MacArthur BART
Station – 2006
Walk & Bicycle 34- 40% 42% 39- 45% 36%
Transit 17- 23% 26% 19- 25% 39%
Drive Alone, Drop- Off,
Carpool & Taxi 40- 46% 32% 33- 39% 25%
Source: BART, 2006 and Fehr & Peers, 2006.
Moving Toward an Urban Station Typology
Access mode changes since 1998 have placed the MacArthur Station in the upper range of the Urban with
Parking Station typology. With the forecast land use changes in the station area, including the proposed Transit
Village, BART expects to reclassify the MacArthur Station as an Urban Station. As shown in Table 3- 6, meeting
this goal will require an even more substantial shift toward non- auto access modes, especially on an all- day basis.
The recommended Access Strategies in this study focus on obtaining an Urban Station classification for
MacArthur BART Station by 2030.
34
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
TABLE 3- 6
TARGET ACCESS MODE SHARES
Daily
Access Mode “ Urban” Station
Type Ranges
MacArthur BART
Station, 2006
Walk & Bicycle 69- 75% 36%
Transit 17- 23% 39%
Drive Alone, Drop- Off, Carpool & Taxi 6- 12% 25%
Source: BART, 2007 and Fehr & Peers, 2007
35
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
4. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS
Almost one- third ( 29%) of MacArthur BART patrons currently access the station by walking. Pedestrians travel
along several transit and retail corridors en route to the station. As shown in Figure 4- 1, 58% of BART riders
accessing the MacArthur Station on foot have trip origins within ½ - mile of the station ( or a 10- minute walk- shed)
and some riders are walking as far as 1 to 2 miles to access the station. However, over 12% of drive alone trips
to the station also originate within ½ - mile of the station, indicating there may be significant opportunities for
increasing pedestrian access mode share.
The following provides a discussion of existing pedestrian access conditions and planned improvements and
identifies a set of objectives for improved pedestrian access.
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AND CONDITIONS
While patrons access the MacArthur BART Station from all of the surrounding streets, platform survey results
suggest that approximately half of the pedestrians originate from areas to the northeast and access the station
along Telegraph Avenue or 40th Street.
Off- Site Facilities
The City of Oakland’s Pedestrian Master Plan ( November 2002) designates MacArthur Boulevard, Market Street,
Martin Luther King Jr. Way, Telegraph Avenue, Broadway, and 51st Street as City Routes, and 40th Street, West
Street, and Shattuck Avenue as District Routes ( as shown in Figure 4- 2). According to the plan,
City routes designate streets that are destinations in themselves – places to live, work, shop, socialize,
and travel. They provide the most direct connections between walking and transit and connect multiple
districts in the City. District routes have a local function as the location of schools, community centers,
and smaller scale shopping. They are often located within a single district and help to define the character
of that district ( Oakland Pedestrian Master Plan, page 48).
The pedestrian facilities in the surrounding neighborhood are typical of an urban environment. All of the
surrounding streets provide sidewalks and marked crosswalks at intersections with major roadways. Pedestrian
signal heads, audible warnings, and pedestrian push buttons are provided at most signalized intersections. All of
the signalized intersections surrounding the MacArthur BART station have pedestrian signal heads and marked
crosswalks. There are also marked crosswalks at the uncontrolled 40th Street/ Frontage Road intersection.
Since the street network is a grid, the pedestrian facilities provide a number of routes to and from the MacArthur
BART station, although access is limited underneath Highway 24 and the BART line. Highway 24, which is
elevated, limits the east- west pedestrian connections within a 1/ 4- mile of the station to three roadways: 42nd
Street, 40th Street, and West MacArthur Boulevard.
While the typical sidewalk widths surrounding the station exceed Americans with Disabilities ( ADA) minimum
width requirements, ADA standards for ramps and side- slopes are not met at all intersections. Additionally, the
sidewalk width near some of the bus stops is inadequate and creates crowding issues.
There are a number of sidewalk locations with uneven surfaces. The overall walkability of the area also suffers
from a lack of street plantings and pedestrian- level lighting. The poor walkability is especially evident along
sections of 40th Street and West MacArthur Boulevard under Highway 24, which are dark, loud, and littered.
Access to the BART entrance from the neighborhood south of West MacArthur Boulevard is limited, as there are
no marked crosswalks between Telegraph Avenue and Martin Luther King, Jr. Way.
ASHBY
MACARTHUR
ROCKRIDGE
12TH STREET
19TH STREET
LAKE MERRITT
WEST OAKLAND
GIS Data Source: MTC, City of Oakland, Census2000, ESRI, BART, AC Transit
Location: Oakland, CA
Trip Survey by Corey, Canapari and Galanis Research 2006
0 0.5 1
Miles
Patrons per Origin Location
1
2 - 5
6 - 10
11 - 20
21 - 27
BART Station
BART
AC Transit
Walked to MacArthur BART Station
58.0%
32.5%
89.5%
94.4%
95.5%
Percent of Trip Origins
within Buffers - Walked
1/ 2 mile
1 mile
1.5 mile
2 mile
1/ 4 mile
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 4- 1 FIGURE 4- 1
MACARTHUR BART STATION PATRON ORIGINS -
WALK ACCESS MODE
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 4- 4 FIGURE 4- 2
CITY OF OAKLAND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
PEDESTRIAN ROUTE NETWORK COUNCIL DISTRICT 1
NOT TO SCALE
N
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
38
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Pedestrians were observed illegally crossing West MacArthur Boulevard to the BART station between these
intersections, using the median as a refuge. 2
On- Site Facilities
Existing pedestrian circulation on- site and surrounding the station is provided via sidewalks and marked
crosswalks, as shown in Figure 4- 3.
Within the MacArthur BART station, ADA compliant sidewalks are provided along both sides of the Frontage
Road and the north side of the parking lot. As in the surrounding area, while the typical sidewalk widths on- site
exceed ADA minimum widths, there are sections along the Frontage Road in front of the shuttle stops that are
narrow and present crowding issues.
Within the parking lot, there are no designated pedestrian routes; patrons walk along the parking aisles. There
are three stairways that connect the parking lot, which is approximately eight feet below grade, to the Frontage
Road and BART Plaza. Because the parking lot is below grade and parking spaces closest to the BART Plaza
require using stairs, the ADA accessible parking spaces are located approximately 280 feet south of the fare gate
plaza along the south side of Frontage Road, as shown in Figure 4- 4.
The primary access between these parking spaces and the BART Plaza is a gently sloped sidewalk located on
the east side of the Frontage Road.
Pedestrian Usage
AM and PM peak period ( 7: 00 - 9: 00 AM and 4: 00 - 6: 00 PM) pedestrian counts were taken at intersections
surrounding the MacArthur BART station in May 2006. Existing pedestrian counts and the designated pedestrian
routes in the project area are shown on Figure 4- 5.
PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
The City of Oakland’s 40th Street Improvement/ MacArthur Transit Hub project, which will be constructed by Spring
2009, includes improvements to the pedestrian facilities surrounding the MacArthur BART station. The
improvements, as described in the Plans for 40th Street, MacArthur Transit Hub Improvements, 3 include:
􀁸 Crosswalk improvements at the 40th Street/ Martin Luther King Jr. Way and 40th Street/ Telegraph
Avenue intersections
􀁸 Sidewalk bulbouts on the west side of the 40th Street/ Telegraph Avenue intersection at the existing bus
stop
􀁸 Installation of a new traffic signal with pedestrian crossing phases at the 40th Street/ Frontage Road
intersection
􀁸 Bicycle lanes along 40th Street between Telegraph Avenue and Martin Luther King, Jr. Way
2 Observation by Fehr & Peers in July 2007.
3 City of Oakland, July 2006.
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 4- 5 FIGURE 4- 3
EXISTING ON- SITE PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
MACARTHUR BLVD
APGAR ST
40TH STREET
39TH ST
APGAR ST
39TH ST
TELEGRAPH AVENUE
MARTIN LUTHER KING WAY
LEGEND:
= Funded
Sidewalk
= Existing
Crosswalk
= Station
Plaza
= Stairs
= Existing
Sidewalk
= Funded
Crosswalk
ADA
CS
MS
SA
W. MACARTHUR BLVD
APGAR ST
40TH STREET
39TH ST
TELEGRAPH AVENUE
APGAR S
39TH S
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 4- 6 FIGURE 4- 4
LOCATION OF ADA- ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
LEGEND:
= Monthly Permit
Area
= ADA Accessible
Spaces
= Car Share
Spaces
= Station Agent
Spaces
= Daily Fee Area
= Motorcycle
Spaces
ADA
MS
CS
SA
980
123
24
Telegraph Ave.
Telegraph Ave.
Broadway
Webster St.
West St.
Market St.
M. L. King Jr. Wy.
MacArthur Blvd.
27th St.
San Pablo Ave.
Shattuck Ave.
Claremont
Ave.
52nd St. 51st St.
40th St.
45th St.
38th St.
34th St.
Piedmont Ave.
Howe St.
Manila Ave.
Broadway
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1213
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23 22
24
Telegraph Ave.
13
72
( 94)
137
( 86)
58
( 40)
92
( 111)
Telegraph Ave.
Telegraph Ave.
15
7
( 1)
6
( 8)
27
( 44)
10
40th St. 40th St. 38th St.
146
( 213)
120
( 135)
BART Station
Driveway
9
40th St.
13
( 8)
71
( 39)
22
( 25)
22
( 0)
MLK Jr. Way
18
17
( 9)
19
( 17)
16
( 10)
12
( 12)
MLK Jr. Way
MacArthur
Blvd.
19
98
( 79)
MacArthur
Blvd.
20
40
( 26)
9
( 19)
31
( 92)
25
( 39)
MacArthur
Blvd.
BART Station
Driveway
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Drat Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 4- 7
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES
AND DESIGNATED ROUTES
FIGURE 4- 5
SOURCE: Routes: Pedestrian Master Plan
( City of Oakland, November 2002)
Volumes: Fehr & Peers, 2006
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
LEGEND:
N
Not to Scale
= City Route
= District Route
= Project Site
XX ( YY) = AM ( PM)
Peak Hour
Pedestrian
Volumes
= Study
Intersections
1
42
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
􀁸 Construction of an additional crosswalk on the west side of the 40th Street/ Frontage Road intersection,
including the creation of a mid- block pedestrian refuge in the median
􀁸 Installation of pedestrian lighting along 40th Street, including under Highway 24 underpass, as well as
bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding signage to the station
These improvements are not repeated in the access recommendations presented in this study because they are
expected to be completed in the near- term, independent of the findings of this study and/ or the proposed Transit
Village project.
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS OBJECTIVES
Based on existing conditions and anticipated access needs associated with a shift to non- auto access modes, the
objectives for pedestrian access to the MacArthur BART Station include:
1. Provide safe, efficient connections between BART fare gates and adjacent streets, including the
proposed Telegraph Avenue Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) service.
2. Provide safe crossing opportunities, particularly of arterials surrounding the site ( 40th Street, Telegraph
Avenue, West MacArthur Boulevard, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Way).
3. Improve pedestrian facilities within a 1/ 2- mile radius of the station to facilitate pedestrian access to BART.
4. Enhance personal safety for pedestrians to enable the efficacy of non- auto access strategies and
incentives.
43
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
5. TRANSIT ACCESS
More than one- third ( 39%) of MacArthur BART patrons currently use bus and shuttle services to access the
station. Based on platform survey results, a majority of commute- trip patrons come from locations along the
Emery- Go- Round routes, along Telegraph Avenue south of the station and Broadway in Oakland, and along
Piedmont Avenue and West MacArthur Boulevard between Broadway and Lakeshore Avenue, as shown in Figure
5- 1.4
The following provides a discussion of existing transit access conditions and planned improvements and identifies
a set of objectives for improved transit access.
EXISTING TRANSIT FACILITIES, SERVICES, AND CONDITIONS
The transit services near the MacArthur BART Station include Alameda- Contra Costa Transit District ( AC Transit),
which provides local and TransBay ( San Francisco) bus service; the Emery- Go- Round, Kaiser, Summit and
Oakland Children’s Hospital shuttles; and BART rail service. Figure 5- 2 shows the bus and shuttle stop locations
at the station. Each service is described below.
The MacArthur BART Station is a major transit transfer hub as well as a layover point along several bus lines.
The station provides restroom facilities for transit operators.
AC Transit
AC Transit provides bus service in 13 cities and adjacent unincorporated areas in Alameda County and Contra
Costa County, with TransBay service serving destinations in San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara
Counties. Four AC Transit bus lines directly serve the MacArthur BART station. Four more AC Transit bus lines
pass within one block of the project site and four AC Transit school bus lines serve the station. All of the AC
Transit buses that directly serve the MacArthur BART station stop along 40th Street, under the Highway 24
overpass, just north of the BART station fare gates. The characteristics of the AC Transit lines serving the project
area are summarized in Table 5- 1 .
Local adult fares, as of August 2007, are $ 1.75. A $ 0.25 discount is given with a transfer obtained from machines
within the paid area of BART stations. A transfer to other local AC Transit lines is an additional $ 0.25. TransBay
adult fares are $ 3.50 and provide a free transfer to or from connecting AC Transit lines. Ten- and 30- day passes
are also available for both local and TransBay services. Fares are paid on the bus, and passengers must have
exact change. AC Transit also honors TransLink, a universal fare card, which is planned to be introduced to the
entire Bay Area region in the spring of 2008 ( but is not yet compatible with BART).
Data presented in this report is based on bus lines in service as of May 2007. In June 2007, AC Transit made
several changes to local bus lines serving the station. These changes include the following:
4 A sizeable number of transit trips to MacArthur BART are shown originating within ¼ - mile of the MacArthur BART station,
which suggests that patrons may have misunderstood the question, perhaps considering their BART travel as transit access.
ASHBY
MACARTHUR
ROCKRIDGE
12TH STREET
19TH STREET
LAKE MERRITT
WEST OAKLAND
GIS Data Source: MTC, City of Oakland, Census2000, ESRI, BART, AC Transit
Location: Oakland, CA
Trip Survey by Corey, Canapari and Galanis Research 2006
0 0.5 1
Miles
Patrons per Origin Location
1
2 - 5
6 - 10
11 - 19
BART Station
BART
AC Transit
Rode Transit to MacArthur BART Station
05.5%
03.4%
41.1%
61.0%
89.6%
Percent of Trip Origins
within Buffers - Rode Transit
1/ 2 mile
1 mile
1.5 mile
2 mile
1/ 4 mile
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 5- 1 FIGURE 5- 1
MACARTHUR BART STATION PATRON ORIGINS -
TRANSIT ACCESS MODE
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
April 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 5- 2 FIGURE 5- 2
TRANSIT AND SHUTTLE FACILITIES AT MACARTHUR BART STATION
AT THE TIME OF PLATFORM SURVEYS
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
12,14,40,40L, 43,800
40,40L, 43,800
C, 57,653,658,660,662
C, 57,653,660,662
12,15
12,14
15
C, 12,14,57,
653,660,662
C, 57,653,660,662
12
14
C, 12,14,57,
653,660,662
MACARTHUR BLVD
APGAR ST
40TH STREET
39TH ST
TELEGRAPH AVENUE
MARTIN LUTHER KING WAY
APGAR ST
39TH ST
LEGEND:
= AC Transit
Bus Stops
= Caltrans
Bicycle
Shuttle Stop
= Emery-
Go- Round
Shuttle Stops
= Hospital
Shuttle Stop
46
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
TABLE 5- 1
AC TRANSIT SERVICE SUMMARY
Line Route Nearest Weekday Weekend
Stop Hours Headway Hours Headway
Bus Type
Local Routes
12
( Grand Avenue)
MacArthur BART
station to downtown
Oakland
40th Street at
MacArthur BART
Station
6: 00 AM to
7: 00 PM 20 minutes 7: 00 AM to
7: 00 PM 30 minutes
40- foot buses with a
30- person seating &
90- person standing
capacity
14
( East 18th Street)
MacArthur BART
station to Dimond
District
40th Street at
MacArthur BART
Station
6: 00 AM to
7: 30 PM
15 minutes
( peak);
20 minutes
( off- peak)
7: 00 AM to
7: 00 PM 30 minutes
40- foot buses with a
30- person seating &
90- person standing
capacity
18
( Shattuck
Avenue) a
Albany to Montclair
District
40th Street/
Telegraph
Avenue
5: 00 AM to
12: 30 AM
15- to 20-
minutes
6: 00 AM to
12: 30 PM 20 minutes
40- foot buses with a
30- person seating &
90- person standing
capacity
57
( 40th Street)
Emeryville to the
Eastmont Transit
Center
40th Street at
MacArthur BART
Station
5: 30 AM to
12: 00 AM
12- minutes
( daytime); 20-
30 minutes
( early morning
& late night)
6: 00 AM to
12: 00 AM
15- minute
( daytime);
30- minute
( late night)
40- foot buses with a
30- person seating &
90- person standing
capacity
800
( All Nighter)
Downtown San
Francisco to the
Richmond BART
station
40th Street at
MacArthur BART
Station
12: 20 AM to
5: 20 AM
( weekdays &
Saturdays)
60 minutes
12: 20 AM to
7: 20 AM
( Sundays)
60 minutes
40- foot buses with a
30- person seating &
90- person standing
capacity
1
( Telegraph) b
Downtown Berkeley to
the Bay Fair BART
station
40th Street/
Telegraph
Avenue
5: 00 AM to
1: 00 AM 15- 20- minutes 5: 00 AM to
1: 00 AM
15- to 20-
minutes
1R
( Telegraph/
International
Boulevard
Rapid) c
Downtown Berkeley to
the Bay Fair BART
station ( limited stops)
40th Street/
Telegraph
Avenue
6: 00 AM to
8: 30 PM 12- minutes 7: 30 AM to
7: 00 PM 15- minutes
60- foot articulated
buses with a 40-
person seating & 130-
person standing
capacity
15
( Martin Luther
King, Jr. Way)
El Cerrito BART station
& Montclair District
40th Street/ Martin
Luther King Jr.
Way
6: 00 AM to
9: 30 PM
15 minutes
( daytime);
30 minutes
( evening)
6: 30 AM to
10: 30 PM
20 minutes
( daytime);
30 minutes
( evening)
40- foot buses with a
30- person seating &
90- person standing
capacity
Other Routes
C
( Moraga Avenue)
Piedmont to Downtown
San Francisco
40th Street at
MacArthur BART
Station
5: 55 AM to
8: 55 AM 30 minutes 3: 39 PM to
8: 24 PM 30 minutes
40- foot buses with a
30- person seating &
90- person standing
capacity
School Service
Montera Middle School
( Lines 653 & 660);
Skyline High School
( Lines 658 & 662)
40th Street at
MacArthur BART
Station
One bus per day in each
direction No service
40- foot buses with a
30- person seating &
90- person standing
capacity
a Line 43 before June 2007
b Line 40 before June 2007
c Line 40L before June 2007. The 1R line is planned to become ultimately a Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) line. The proposed BRT is currently under
environmental review by AC Transit and the Federal Transit Administration.
Source: AC Transit, July 2007.
47
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
􀁸 Replaced the 40/ 40L line with the 1 and 1R ( Telegraph/ International Boulevard Rapid) lines. The 1 line is
a local bus with 15- minute headways that replaces the 40/ 40L line on Telegraph Avenue. The 1R is a
Rapid line, with limited stops and 9- minute headways that replaces the 82L and portions of the 40L line
on Telegraph Avenue.
􀁸 Replaced Line 43 with Line 18 along Telegraph Avenue and Shattuck Avenue.
􀁸 Changed service frequency on Line 15 from 15 to 20 minutes.
Figure 5- 3 shows the AC Transit routes serving MacArthur BART at the time of the platform surveys. Figure 5- 4
shows the current AC Transit routes, as of July 2007.
AC Transit Ridership
Table 5- 2 shows the capacity and loads ( passengers) of the AC Transit lines serving the project site and vicinity.
Average and maximum load factors are also shown. The load factor is defined as the ratio of occupied seats to
the number of seats on the bus. A load factor of 100 percent or more indicates that the bus operates at or above
its seated capacity. On average, bus lines serving the MacArthur BART Station have excess capacity, with
average daily load factors of 58 percent or less. As of July 2007, maximum loads are at or above capacity on the
40/ 40L line and the 43 line in both directions near the project. 5
Shuttle Services
Five shuttle services directly serve the MacArthur BART station: the Emery- Go- Round, the Kaiser Hospital
shuttle, the Alta Bates Summit Hospital shuttle, the Oakland Children’s Hospital shuttle, and the Caltrans bicycle
shuttle ( see Figure 5- 5). They are all free except for the Caltrans bicycle shuttle. The Emery- Go- Round, Kaiser,
Summit, and Oakland Children’s Hospital shuttles currently stop along the Frontage Road east of the BART
station fare gates. The shuttles provide connections from the station to surrounding hospitals, businesses,
residences, and shopping areas. Each shuttle service is described in more detail below. The Caltrans bicycle
shuttle also stops along the Frontage Road, southeast of the fare gates.
A majority of BART patrons
who access the station by
transit ride one of the shuttles.
As noted, based on the 2006
platform survey, 52% used
Emery- Go- Round, 25% used
AC Transit, 13% used the
Kaiser Hospital Shuttle, 4%
used the Children’s Hospital
Shuttle, and 6% used the Alta
Bates Summit Hospital
Shuttle.
5 AC Transit, July 2007. Note that load factors are not available for Lines 1, 1R and 18 as these lines were established in June
2007. As a result, load factors are provided for the prior lines 40, 40L and 43, respectively.
Lake
Merritt
Emeryville
PKWY.
HARRISON ST.
LAKESIDE DR.
ST.
. EVA OLBAP NAS
GRAND AVE.
MARKET ST.
ADELINE ST.
7 th ST.
A S T.
MANDELA
D AVE.
7
18th ST.
STANFORD AVE.
ADELINE ST.
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. WAY
TELEGRAPH AVE.
CLAY ST.
BROADWAY
ST.
OAKLAND AVE.
LAKESHORE
AVE.
PARK BLVD.
MANDANA BLVD.
WILDWO
O
D
AVE.
HIGHLAND AVE.
MORAGA AVE.
OAKLAND AVE.
BROADWAY TERRACE
GRAND AVE.
51st ST.
CLAREMONT AVE
ST.
14th ST.
8th ST.
7th ST.
12th ST.
RISON ST.
17th ST.
17th ST.
BROOKLYN AVE.
HANOVER
AVE.
EBSTER ST.
PIEDMONT AVE.
40th ST.
24
PLEASANT VALLEY
AVE.
BROADWAY
COLLEGE AVE.
0
HOWE ST.
MANILA AVE.
34TH ST.
W. MACARTHUR BLVD.
POWELL AVE.
HORTON ST.
SANTA
CLARA AVE.
S
WEBSTER ST.
SHAFTER AVE.
N
Not to Scale
HOLLIS ST.
32ND ST.
SHATTUCK
W. GRAND AVE.
980
BROADWAY
WEBSTER ST.
HAWTHORNE
SUMMIT ST.
580
MACARTHUR BLVD.
. TS ht92
CHRISTIE
AVE.
SHELLMOUND AVE.
LINDA
GLENAVE
MacArthur
BART Station
To
San Francisco
Oakland
LEGEND:
= AC Transit Line 12
= AC Transit Line 14
= AC Transit Line 15
= AC Transit Line 40, 40L
= AC Transit Line 43
= AC Transit Line 57
= AC Transit Line C
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 5- 3 FIGURE 5- 3
AC TRANSIT SERVICE AT TIME OF PLATFORM SURVEYS
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
0
PKWY.
HARRISON ST.
SAN PABLO AVE.
MARKET ST.
ADELINE ST.
7 th ST.
PERALTA ST.
MANDELA
D AVE.
18th ST.
STANFORD AVE.
ADELINE ST.
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. WAY
TELEGRAPH AVE.
OAKLAND AVE.
MANDANA BLVD
HIGHLAND AVE.
MORAGA AVE.
OAKLAND AVE.
BROADWAY TERRACE
GRAND AVE.
51st ST.
55th ST.
14th
PIEDMONT AVE.
40th ST.
24
PLEASANT VALLEY
AVE.
BROADWAY
COLLEGE AVE.
HOWE ST.
MANILA AVE.
34TH ST.
W. MACARTHUR BLVD.
POWELL AVE.
HORTON ST.
SANTA
CLARA AVE.
WEBSTER ST.
SHAFTER AVE.
N
Not to Scale
HOLLIS ST.
32ND ST.
SHATTUCK
W. GRAND AVE.
BROADWAY
WEBSTER ST.
HAWTHORNE
SUMMIT ST.
580
MACARTHUR BLVD.
29th ST.
CHRISTIE
AVE.
SHELLMOUND AVE.
LINDA
GLENAVE
To
San Francisco
Oakland
1R
1
800
12
12
12
14
14
14
15
15
18
18
18
57
57
57
57
57
CB
CB CB
C C
C
C
C
C
Emeryville
MacArthur
BART Station
980
LEGEND:
C ransit ine C
C ransit ine C
C ransit ine , , 00
C ransit ine 2
C ransit ine
C ransit ine
C ransit ine
C ransit ine
1 1R 800
12
14
15
18
57
CB
C
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 5- 4 FIGURE 5- 4
CURRENT AC TRANSIT SERVICE
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
50
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
TABLE 5- 2
AC TRANSIT LOADS, BOARDINGS AND ALIGHTINGS ( AVERAGE WEEKDAY)
Bus
Line Stop Location Direction
Average
Capacity
( Seats)
Avg.
Loada
Avg.
Load
Factorb
Maximum
Loadc
Max.
Load
Factord
Boardings
( On’s) e
Alightings
( Off’s) f
12 MacArthur BART EB 3.5 12% 7 23% 116 0
Station WB
30
0.2 1% 1 3% 0 99
EB 3.4 11% 6 20% 135 0
14 MacArthur BART
Station WB
30
0.4 1% 5 17% 0 119
EB 9.9 33% 19 63% 50 68
15 on MLK Jr. Way at
40th Street WB
30
9.3 31% 21 70% 62 46
EB 10.2 34% 19 63% 24 10
15 on MLK Jr. Way at W.
MacArthur Blvd. WB
30
9.0 30% 20 67% 6 15
40/ SB 19.0 48% 50 125% 121 154
40L g
on Telegraph Ave. at
40th Street NB
40
21.0 53% 52 130% 159 124
40/ SB 19.3 48% 57 143% 50 29
40L g
on Telegraph Ave. at
MacArthur Blvd/ 38th
St. h NB
40
20.5 51% 47 118% 29 50
SB 12.3 41% 30 100% 97 92
43 g on Telegraph Ave. at
40th Street NB
30
17.5 58% 60 200% 151 95
SB 12.5 42% 30 100% 31 20
43 g
on Telegraph Ave. at
MacArthur Blvd/ 38th
St. h NB
30
16.6 55% 59 197% 31 40
EB 12.6 42% 22 73% 300 119
57 MacArthur BART
Station WB
30
10.1 34% 25 83% 101 205
EB 8.9 30% 14 47% 1 3
800 on Telegraph Ave. at
40th Street WB
30
6.9 23% 10 33% 1 1
EB 9.3 31% 15 50% 1 3
800
on Telegraph Ave. at
MacArthur Blvd./ 38th
St. i WB
30
6.8 23% 10 33% 1 1
EB 7.0 23% 16 53% 7 5
C MacArthur BART
Station WB
30
8.5 28% 13 43% 4 13
Bold indicates maximum load factor above seating capacity.
a Number of passengers on the bus averaged on a typical weekday.
b Average load divided by average seated capacity.
c Maximum number of passengers on the bus observed on a typical weekday.
d Maximum load divided by average seated capacity.
e Total number of passengers boarding the bus at this location on a typical weekday.
f Total number of passengers alighting the bus at this location on a typical weekday.
g Lines 40 and 40L were replaced by Lines 1/ 1R in June 2007 and Line 43 was replaced by Line 18. Since ridership data for Lines 1, 1R, and 18 are not
available, the existing data for Lines 1/ 1R and 18 are shown.
h Lines 40- 40L and 43 southbound buses stop at MacArthur Boulevard.; northbound buses stop at 38th Street.
i Line 800 westbound buses stop at MacArthur Boulevard.; eastbound buses stop at 38th Street.
Source: Data collected June 2006 – June 2007 and provided by Howard Der, AC Transit, July 2007.
Lake
Merritt
Emeryville
PKWY.
HARRISON ST.
LAKESIDE DR.
ST.
SAN PABLO AVE.
GRAND AVE.
MARKET ST.
ADELINE ST.
7 th ST.
A S T.
MANDELA
D AVE.
7
18th ST.
STANFORD AVE.
ADELINE ST.
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. WAY
TELEGRAPH AVE.
CLAY ST.
BROADWAY
ST.
OAKLAND AVE.
LAKESHORE
AVE.
PARK BLVD.
MANDANA BLVD.
WILDWOOD
AVE.
HIGHLAND AVE.
MORAGA AVE.
OAKLAND AVE.
BROADWAY TERRACE
GRAND AVE.
51st ST.
CLAREMONT AVE
ST.
14th ST.
8th ST.
7th ST.
12th ST.
RISON ST.
17th ST.
17th ST.
BROOKLYN AVE.
HANOVER
AVE.
EBSTER ST.
PIEDMONT AVE.
40th ST.
24
PLEASANT VALLEY
AVE.
BROADWAY
COLLEGE AVE.
0
HOWE ST.
MANILA AVE.
34TH ST.
W. MACARTHUR BLVD.
POWELL AVE.
HORTON ST.
SANTA
CLARA AVE.
S
WEBSTER ST.
SHAFTER AVE.
N
Not to Scale
HOLLIS ST.
32ND ST.
SHATTUCK
W. GRAND AVE.
980
BROADWAY
WEBSTER ST.
HAWTHORNE
SUMMIT ST.
580
MACARTHUR BLVD.
29th ST.
CHRISTIE
AVE.
SHELLMOUND AVE.
LINDA
GLENAVE
MacArthur
BART Station
To
San Francisco
Oakland
LEGEND:
= Kaiser Hospital
= Caltrain Bicycle Shuttle
= Alta Bates Summit Medical Center
= Emery Go Round
= Oakland Children’s Hospital
April 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 5- 5 FIGURE 5- 5
EXISTING SHUTTLE SERVICE ( March 2008)
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
52
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Emery- Go- Round
The Emery- Go- Round shuttle connects the MacArthur BART station with destinations within the City of
Emeryville. As of October 2007, there are six routes that serve the MacArthur BART station on weekdays and a
single route on weekends. On weekdays, the BART Shopper, Hollis Amtrak, Hollis North, Watergate Express,
Powell, and Hollis Routes operate between the MacArthur BART station and destinations including the East Bay
Bridge shopping area, major employers such as Pixar and Novartis, the Emeryville Amtrak station, the Watergate
condominium complex, IKEA, and residential areas. On weekends, the BART Shopper route operates between
the MacArthur BART station and the Emeryville Public Market on 40th Street, Shellmound Street, and Christie
Avenue. The travel time between the MacArthur BART station and the Emeryville shopping district is
approximately 15 minutes.
The Hollis Amtrak, Hollis North, and Watergate Express shuttles operate on weekdays only between 7: 00 AM and
7: 00 PM, with 12- minute headways during peak hours and 20- minute headways during the mid- day. The Powell
and Hollis routes operate on weekdays only from 5: 45 AM to 7: 00 AM and from 7: 00 PM to 10: 00 PM, with
service every 20 to 40 minutes.
The BART Shopper operates on weekdays between 7: 00 AM and 7: 00 PM, with 12- minute headways during peak
hours and 15- minute headways during the mid- day; on Saturdays between 9: 30 AM and 9: 30 PM with 30 to 40
minute headways; and on Sundays between 10: 30 AM and 6: 00 PM with 40- minute headways. 6
Emery- Go- Round buses are equipped with NextBus technology, which allows patrons to access the real- time
location or estimated arrival times of vehicles from the Internet or mobile devices. Emery- Go- Round has plans to
install a NextBus sign at the MacArthur BART station to display the estimated arrival time of the Hollis and Powell
shuttles. Emery- Go- Round is operated with 35- foot vehicles that carry approximately 45 passengers. Emery- Go-
Round buses layover along the south side of 40th Street, east of Martin Luther King, Jr. Way. During peak
periods, the Emery- Go- Round shuttles are over capacity and require some patrons to stand. Data from the 2005
BayCap BART Shuttle Rider Survey7 indicates that the Emery- Go- Round shuttle is the largest BART shuttle
service, carrying approximately 850,000 annual passengers, with 80 percent of weekday passengers beginning or
ending their shuttle trip at the MacArthur BART station.
Kaiser Medical Center
Kaiser Medical Center operates a free shuttle to serve its main hospital on Howe Street and the Mosswood
Building on Broadway near I- 580. Shuttles operate every 15 minutes from 5: 30 AM to 11: 45 PM on weekdays
only and have an estimated travel time of 10 minutes. The service is operated by a minibus with a 22- person
capacity. The shuttles, which are also used by the public, currently transport about 1,200 passengers each day.
Kaiser plans to increase the shuttle service to serve new buildings planned as part of their expansion project in
the next few years.
Oakland Children’s Hospital
Free shuttle service is provided between the MacArthur BART station and Oakland Children’s Hospital at 52nd
Street and Martin Luther King Jr. Way. The service operates on weekdays only from 6: 00 AM to 12: 00 AM, with
headways between 8 and 15 minutes. The service uses 15- passenger vans and has an estimated travel time of
10 minutes. The shuttles currently transport about 450 passengers each day.
6 Emery- Go- Round website as of October 2007.
7 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2005.
53
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Alta Bates Summit Medical Center
Summit Medical Center operates a free shuttle for employees and visitors between the MacArthur BART station
and the Summit Medical Center Campus, located between Telegraph Avenue and Broadway, just south of I- 580.
The service operates from 6: 00 AM to 9: 00 AM and 2: 00 PM to 7: 30 PM on weekdays only, and has an estimated
travel time of 10 minutes. The service is operated using 15- seat passenger vans.
Caltrans Bicycle Shuttle
Caltrans District 4 operates the San Francisco- Oakland Bay Bridge Bicycle Shuttle between the MacArthur BART
station, the Bay Bridge Bus Stop on Treasure Island, and the TransBay Terminal in Downtown San Francisco to
transport cyclists across the Bay when bicycles are prohibited on BART trains ( bicycles are prohibited on the Bay
Bridge at all times). The Caltrans shuttle costs $ 1.00 per direction of travel. In the morning, four shuttles leave
from the MacArthur BART station for San Francisco ( at 6: 20 AM, 7: 00 AM, 7: 45 AM and 8: 30 AM) and three leave
from San Francisco for Oakland ( at 6: 40 AM, 7: 25 AM, and 8: 10 AM). In the evening, three shuttles leave San
Francisco for the MacArthur BART station ( at 4: 15 PM, 5: 05 PM, and 5: 55 PM) and four shuttles leave Oakland
for San Francisco ( at 3: 50 PM, 4: 40 PM, 5: 30 PM, and 6: 15 PM). The service is operated by a 15- passenger van
pulling a trailer that holds 15 bicycles.
PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
AC Transit ultimately plans to convert the 1R line to a Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) line. The proposed BRT project
would improve bus operations by allowing buses to travel on dedicated lanes between Berkeley, Oakland, and
San Leandro. In the project vicinity, BRT would generally eliminate one through lane in each direction, narrowing
Telegraph Avenue to one through lane in each direction. AC Transit published a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement / Environmental Impact Report ( EIS/ EIR) for the implementation of the BRT project in May 2007.
There are currently no finalized design plans, an assurance of full funding, or approvals from AC Transit, the City
of Oakland, and other public agencies.
TRANSIT ACCESS OBJECTIVES
The over- arching transit access objective is to increase BART ridership. Supporting objectives related to feeder
transit services to the MacArthur Station include:
1. Maintain or improve travel times and route directness and increase transit ( bus/ shuttle) service frequency.
2. Provide flexible design for bus bays and layover areas to accommodate existing and future demand with
a measure of flexibility for future changes.
3. Enhance personal safety for transit patrons.
4. Minimize transit impacts associated with traffic congestion and drop offs/ pick ups.
54
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
6. BICYCLE ACCESS
Seven percent of MacArthur BART Station patrons currently access the station by bicycle. As shown in Figure
6- 1, 34% of these bicyclists have trip origins within ½ - mile of the station. Almost all bicyclists have an origin
within two miles of the station. Based on the platform survey, while patrons access the station from all of the
surrounding streets, approximately half of the cyclists use Telegraph Avenue.
The following provides a discussion of existing bicycle access conditions and planned improvements and
identifies a set of objectives for improved bicycle access.
EXISTING BICYCLE FACILITIES AND CONDITIONS
Oakland’s climate and topography are very good for bicycling and the grid pattern of the streets, especially
around the MacArthur BART Station, provides numerous potential routes. The City of Oakland is working to
increase bicycle access throughout the City by building new and improving existing bicycle facilities, as detailed in
the recently approved 2007 Oakland Bicycle Master Plan Update. In addition, the Alameda County Congestion
Management Agency’s ( ACCMA) 2006 Countywide Bicycle Plan highlights proposed regional bicycle facilities.
Bicycle facilities can be classified into several types, including:
Class I Paths – These facilities are located off- street and can serve both bicyclists and pedestrians. Class I paths
are typically eight to 12 feet wide ( excluding shoulders) and are generally paved.
Class II Bicycle Lanes – These facilities provide a dedicated area for bicyclists within the paved street width with
striping and appropriate signage. These facilities are typically five to six feet wide.
Class III Bicycle Routes – These facilities are found along streets that do not provide sufficient width for dedicated
bicycle lanes and are provided on low- volume streets that have no bicycle lanes. The street is then designated as
a bicycle route with signage informing drivers to expect bicyclists.
The 2007 Oakland Bicycle Master Plan Update also identifies the following variations on the standard bicycle
route: 8
Class IIIa Arterial Bicycle Routes – Bicycle routes may be used on some arterial streets where bicycle lanes are
not feasible and parallel streets do not provide adequate connectivity. These streets should promote shared use
with lower posted speed limits ( preferably 25 miles per hour), shared lane bicycle stencils, wide curb lanes, and
signage.
Class IIIb Bicycle Boulevards – These are bicycle routes on residential streets that prioritize through trips for
bicyclists. The route should appeal to cyclists of varied skill levels by providing direct connections on streets with
low traffic volumes. The route should reduce delay to bicyclists by assigning right- of- way to travel on the route.
Traffic calming should be introduced as needed to discourage drivers from using the boulevard as a through
route. Intersections with major streets should be controlled by traffic signals with bicycle actuation.
8 2007 Oakland Bicycle Master Plan Update, page 67.
ASHBY
MACARTHUR
ROCKRIDGE
12TH STREET
19TH STREET
LAKE MERRITT
WEST OAKLAND
GIS Data Source: MTC, City of Oakland, Census2000, ESRI, BART, AC Transit
Location: Oakland, CA
Trip Survey by Corey, Canapari and Galanis Research 2006
0 0.5 1
Miles
Patrons per Origin Location
1
2
3
BART Station
BART
AC Transit
Biked to MacArthur BART Station
33.8%
18.5%
75.4%
84.6%
92.3%
Percent of Trip Origins
within Buffers - Biked
1/ 2 mile
1 mile
1.5 mile
2 mile
1/ 4 mile
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 6- 1 FIGURE 6- 1
MACARTHUR BART STATION PATRON ORIGINS -
BICYCLE ACCESS MODE
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
56
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
Surrounding Area
Several existing bicycle facilities are located near the station area, as shown in Figure 6- 2. These include:
􀁸 40th Street ( east- west) – Class II bicycle lanes between San Pablo Avenue and Shellmound Avenues
􀁸 Market Street ( north- south) – Class II bicycle lanes between West MacArthur Boulevard and Adeline
Street
􀁸 West Street ( north- south) – Class II bicycle lanes between West Grand Avenue and 52nd Street; Class III
bicycle route between 52nd Street and Adeline Street
􀁸 Telegraph Avenue ( north- south) – Class II bicycle lanes between Aileen Street and the City of Berkeley
border
􀁸 Webster Street ( north- south) – Class III bicycle route between 29th Street and the City of Berkeley
border, via Shafter Avenue and Colby Street
􀁸 Broadway ( north- south) – Class II bicycle lanes between 26th Street and the I- 580 underpass
Currently no designated bikeways connect to the station. The roads directly adjacent to the station are four- to
six- lane arterials, which are designed for higher- speed traffic and vehicle volumes, and are not favorable to
cycling.
The topography is relatively flat and the local residential streets, such as 38th Street and 41st Street, have low
traffic volumes. However, pavement conditions can be rough on arterial streets such as Broadway and Telegraph
Avenue. Bicycles are not allowed in the 12th and 19th Street BART stations during the AM and PM peak periods9.
Considering this restriction, some cyclists who live close to the downtown Oakland stations ride to the MacArthur
BART station to access BART.
In the project vicinity, the City of Oakland’s 2007 Bicycle Master Plan Update proposes the following ( as shown in
Figure 6- 3):
􀁸 Extension of the Class II lanes on Market Street south of MacArthur Boulevard
􀁸 Extension of the Class II lanes on West Street from MacArthur Boulevard to 52nd Street ( completed)
􀁸 Class II lanes on Telegraph Avenue from Downtown Oakland to the existing lanes at Aileen Street
􀁸 Class II lanes on Shattuck Avenue from Telegraph Avenue to the Berkeley border
􀁸 Extension of the Class II lanes on Broadway from I- 580 to Caldecott Lane
􀁸 Extension of the Class II lanes on 40th Street from Adeline Street to Telegraph Avenue, with a Class IIIb
Bicycle Boulevard on 41st Street between Telegraph Avenue and Broadway, connecting to Class II lanes
on 41st Street between Broadway and Piedmont Avenue
9 BART Fares and Schedules brochure.
Lake
Merritt
Oakland
Emeryville
PKWY.
HARRISON ST.
LAKESIDE DR.
ST.
SAN PABLO AVE.
GRAND AVE.
MARKET ST.
ADELINE ST.
7th ST.
A ST.
MANDELA
D AVE.
7
18th ST.
STANFORD AVE.
ADELINE ST.
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. WA
WEST ST.
Y
TELEGRAPH AVE.
CLAY ST.
BROADWAY
ST.
OAKLAND AVE.
LAKESHORE
AVE.
PARK BLVD.
MANDANA BLVD.
WILDWOOD
AVE.
HIGHLAND AVE.
MORAGA AVE.
OAKLAND AVE.
BROADWAY TERRACE
GRAND AVE.
51st ST.
E
ST.
14th ST.
8th F ST.
7th ST.
12th ST.
RISON ST.
17th ST.
17th ST.
BROOKLYN AVE.
HANOVER
AVE.
EBSTER ST.
PIEDMONT AVE.
40th ST.
24
PLEASANT VALLEY
AVE.
BROADWAY
COLLEGE AVE.
HOWE ST.
MANILA AVE.
34TH ST.
W. MACARTHUR BLVD.
SANTA
CLARA AVE.
S
WEBSTER ST.
SHAFTER AVE.
N
Not to S
HOLLIS ST.
32ND ST.
SHATTUCK
W. GRAND AVE.
980
BROADWAY
WEBSTER ST.
HAWTHORNE
SUMMIT ST.
580
MACARTHUR BLVD.
SHAFTER AVE.
POWELL AVE.
HORTON ST.
CHRISTIE
AVE.
SHELLMOUND AVE.
52nd ST.
LINDA
GLENAVE
LEGEND:
= Existing Class II Bicycle Lanes
= Funded Class II Bicycle Lanes
= Existing Class III Bicycle Route
GENOA ST.
MacArthur
BART Station
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 6- 2 FIGURE 6- 2
SURROUNDING BICYCLE FACILITIES
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
March 2008
SF06- 0245\ graphics\ Draft Access Plan\ Figures\ Mar08\ 0245_ 6- 3 FIGURE 6- 3
PROPOSED OAKLAND BIKEWAY NETWORK
NOT TO SCALE
N
MacArthur BART Station Access Feasibility Study
59
MacArthur BART Access Feasibility Study
May 20, 2008
􀁸 Class IIIa route on 51st Street between Shattuck Avenue and the Piedmont border
􀁸 Class II lanes on West MacArthur Boulevard from Market Street to Harrison Street
􀁸 Class IIIb Bicycle Boulevard on Webster Street/ Shafter Avenue between 29th Street and the Rockridge
BART station
The MacArthur BART Bicycle Access Study, currently under study by the City of Oakland, will identify a
recommended bikeway alignment and design for improving east/ west bicycle access to the MacArthur BART
Station while maintaining quality bus/ shuttle service. The study will evaluate various bicycle facility types and
alignments on West MacArthur Boulevard, 40th Street, and 41st/ 42nd Street to connect the MacArthur BART
Station with City of Emeryville and the Piedmont Avenue neighborhood. 10
Consistent with the City of Oakland’s 2007 Bicycle Master Plan Update, the 2006 Countywide Bicycle Plan
proposes extension of the Class II lanes on Market Street south of West MacArthur Boulevard to 14th Street, and
extension of the Class II lanes on Telegraph Avenue from Aileen Street to 14th Street.
On- Site Facilities
The bicycle facilities on- site are generally limited to support
facilities. Bicycles are not prohibited from entering and
exiting the parking lot or the Frontage Road; however, given
the presence of passenger cars and transit vehicles, they are
not des