26th Annual Report to the San Francisco
Bay Area Congressional Delegation
MARCH 2005
Now Reauthorize
TEA 21Now
TEA 21 Reauthorization Update
Published by the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Legislation and Public Affairs Section
Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter | 101 Eighth Street | Oakland, California 94607
TEL.: 510.464.7700 | TTY/ TDD: 510.464.7769 | FAX: 510.464.7848
E- MAIL: info@ mtc. ca. gov | WEB: www. mtc. ca. gov
26th Annual Report
to Congress
March 2005
Now Reauthorize
TEA 21Now
PRIORITY: URGENT
March 2005
To Our Federal Representatives:
For the last two years, our annual reports to Congress have made the case for a timely
reauthorization of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century ( TEA 21) that:
• Increases funding to better meet our nation’s grow ing infrastructure needs
• Protects the funding firewalls for both the transit and highway program
• Preserves the flexibility and the program structure of TEA 21
In March 2005, we find ourselves revisiting these same themes, but this time with a
greater sense of urgency. Since TEA 21 expired a year and a half ago, Congress has
passed six short- term extensions, the most recent of which expires three months from
now, at the end of May 2005. While we are grateful that Congress has kept federal fund-ing
flowing to metropolitan areas and the states, we urge an end to this stopgap infra-structure
budgeting. Without a multi- year surface transportation program, states and
metropolitan areas lack the financial certainty to move ahead with their long- range
transportation investments. This delays vital improvements and dampens job grow th.
We urge you to put reauthorization of TEA 21 at the top of your legislative agenda
for 2005. America needs a multi- year surface transportation bill now.
Providing the necessary funds to ensure that America’s residents and commercial
goods can get where they need to go — when they need to get there — is crucial to
protecting our quality of life, as well as our economic edge in the increasing ly compet-itive
global marketplace.
We look for ward to working with you in the coming months. Should you have any
questions or comments about this report, please contact:
Tom Bulger, MTC’s Washington, D. C. Advocate, ( 202) 775- 0079
Steve Heminger, MTC Executive Director ( 510) 464- 7810
Randy Rentschler, MTC Legislation and Public Affairs Manager ( 510) 464- 7858.
Sincerely,
Jon Rubin
Chair
METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORT A TION
COMMISSION
Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607- 4700
Tel.: 510.464.7700
TTY/ TDD: 510.464.7769
Fax: 510. 464. 7848
e- mail: info@ mtc. ca. gov
Web site: www. mtc. ca. gov
Jon Rubin, Chair
San Francisco Mayor’s Appointee
John McLemore, Vice Chair
Cities of Santa Clara County
Tom Ammiano
City and County of San Francisco
Irma L. Anderson
Cities of Contra Costa County
Tom Azumbrado
U. S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development
James T. Beall Jr.
Santa Clara County
Bob Blanchard
Sonoma County and Cities
Mark DeSaulnier
Contra Costa County
Bill Dodd
Napa County and Cities
Dorene M. Giacopini
U. S. Department of Transportation
Scott Haggerty
Alameda County
Anne W. Halsted
San Francisco Bay Conservation
and Development Commission
Steve Kinsey
Marin County and Cities
Sue Lempert
Cities of San Mateo County
Michael D. Nevin
San Mateo County
Bijan Sartipi
State Business, Transportation
and Housing Agency
James P. Spering
Solano County and Cities
Pamela Torliatt
Association of Bay Area Governments
Shelia Young
Cities of Alameda County
Steve Heminger
Executive Director
Ann Flemer
Deputy Director/ Operations
Therese W. McMillan
Deputy Director/ Policy
Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I. Reauthorize TEA 21 — Now! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
II. San Francisco Bay Area FY 2006 Funding Requests
San Francisco Bay Area’s Transit Expansion Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
New Starts Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
BART Extension to San Francisco International Airport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
San Francisco Muni Third Street Light- Rail Transit/ Central Subway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Bus and Ferry Transit Expansion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Federal Transit Administration Discretionary Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Federal Highway Administration Discretionary Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
III. Delivering Services and Connecting Communities
Transportation 2030: Mobility for the Next Generation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
System Efficiency: Squeezing Better Mileage from Existing Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Smart Growth Initiatives: Community Focus Sharpens Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Equitable Access to Transportation: Extending the Vision to Every Bay Area Community . . 32
IV. Projects by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Appendix: Bay Area Partnership and MTC Advisory Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Note: Gray lines indicate highways; the multicolored grid illustrates the Bay Area’s extensive public transit network with its numerous operators.
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
MTC Nine- County Bay Area Region
Reauthorize TEA 21 Now!
Transportation Is Top Concern of Bay Area Residents
According to a recent Bay Area Council poll, trans-portation
is — once again — the top concern of
Bay Area residents. This concern was demonstrated
loud and clear in 2004, when Bay Area voters
approved an impressive $ 8 billion in new local
funding measures.
Congress Must Increase Funding for the Core
Programs to Keep Pace with Growing Needs
The Bay Area faces a $ 17 billion shortfall over the
next 25 years simply to operate and maintain its
existing transportation system. For this reason, MTC
continues to support a funding level as close as pos-sible
to last year’s Senate proposal of $ 318 billion
over six years.
Maintain Funding Guarantees for Highways and Transit
One of the most important policy provisions in TEA
21 was the “ firewall” protection of revenue from
both the Highway Trust Fund and the general fund
for both the highway and transit program. MTC
strongly urges Congress to ensure that whatever the
final funding level, all funding is fully guaranteed.
Preserve the Flexibility and the Program
Structure of TEA 21
The basic program structure enacted in the Inter-modal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act ( ISTEA)
and TEA 21 has worked well for over a decade. MTC
urges Congress to maintain this structure and direct
any new funding to the core highway and transit
formula programs rather than creating new discre-tionary
programs.
Continue to Direct Transit Funding to the Most
Congested Urban Areas
The current formulas for the federal transit program
concentrate funding on transit systems that carry the
most passengers. This ensures that federal dollars are
spent where they are needed most. MTC supports
these formulas and the current funding distribution
between the formula and capital programs: 40 per-cent
Rail Modernization, 40 percent New Starts and
20 percent for Bus and Bus Facilities.
Increase State Flexibility to Test the Benefits of
User Fees
In order to provide the option of a congestion- free
commute for both motorists and transit riders using
high- occupancy/ toll ( HOT) lanes, MTC supports a
repeal of the current federal prohibition against tolls
on Interstate highways, as proposed in last year’s
Senate bill.
Strengthen the Metropolitan Transportation
Planning Process
MTC supports the following changes:
• Raise metropolitan planning funds from
1 percent to 1.5 percent of the core high-way
program, including the “ minimum
guarantee” programs.
• Allow for substitution of previously adopted
transportation control measures with newer
strategies that can achieve equivalent or
greater emissions reductions within a simi-lar
timeframe.
• Synchronize the requirements to update
the long- range transportation plan and the
transportation improvement program
( TIP) to a four- year cycle.
FY 2006 Project Requests
• The Bay Area’s first New Starts priority is
the final increment of the BART to San
Francisco International Airport full funding
grant agreement: $ 82.7 million.
• Our next priority is funding for preliminary
engineering for two projects: Muni Third
Street Light- Rail Transit ( Phase 2)/ Central
Subway ($ 20 million) and Silicon Valley
Rapid Transit Corridor ($ 10 million).
• Additional transit and highway project
requests are detailed inside.
Executive Summary
1
2 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Section I
Reauthorize TEA 21 Now!
4 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Transportation Is Top Concern of Bay Area Residents
California has the dubious distinction of having three of the five most congested urban areas in the
nation. The San Francisco- Oakland area ranks second behind Los Angeles at the top of the list. Conges-tion
costs every Bay Area resident hundreds of dollars each year in extra fuel expenses, wasted time and
lost productivity. According to a recent Bay Area Council poll, transportation is — once again — the top
concern of Bay Area residents.
This concern was demonstrated loud and clear in 2004, when Bay Area voters approved an impressive $ 8 bil-lion
in new local funding measures. Transportation sales tax measures in Contra Costa, Marin, San Mateo
and Sonoma counties all received more than two- thirds approval; a new property tax to finance seismic
upgrades throughout the BART system won 68 percent support; an increased AC Transit parcel tax was
approved by nearly 72 percent of voters; and the Regional Measure 2 toll increase was approved by 57 percent
of voters in seven Bay Area counties.
Reauthorize TEA 21 Now!
Providing the necessary funds to ensure that America’s residents and commercial goods can get where they
need to go — when they need to go there — is crucial to protecting our quality of life, as well as our eco-nomic
edge in the increasingly competitive global marketplace. America needs a multi- year surface trans-portation
bill now. The 2004 House and Senate bills to reauthorize the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century ( TEA 21) — H. R. 3550 and S. 1072 — passed by overwhelming majorities last year, reflect the grow-ing
consensus on the range of funding levels feasible and the key policy changes under debate.
On February 9, 2005 the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Leadership introduced
H. R. 3 ( Young), containing $ 284 billion in guaranteed obligations, mirroring the Bush Administration’s
proposed FY 2006 budget. This represents an increase of $ 73 billion or 35 percent in guaranteed obliga-tions
relative to TEA 21 and a 2 percent increase over last year’s proposal, H. R. 3550. As of this writing,
no Senate reauthorization bill has been introduced in the new session.
MTC’s top priorities for reauthorization are as follows:
• Increase funding for the core programs to better meet our nation’s growing infrastructure needs
• Protect the funding firewalls for both the transit and highway programs
• Preserve the flexibility and the program structure of TEA 21
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 Economy/ Crime
Housing
Schools/ Transportation
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Source: Bay Area Council Poll
RANK
Transportation Schools and Education Economy/ Unemployment Housing Crime
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Transportation Is the Bay Area’s Top Concern
Congress Must Increase Funding to Keep Pace with Growing Needs
The United States surface transportation system is in desperate need of
additional federal investment. In California, our capital improvement
program for transportation has virtually ground to a halt, with the
exception of projects funded by locally approved tax increases. The
chart at right shows the multi- billion shortfall the Bay Area faces just
to maintain and operate our transportation system. For this reason,
MTC continues to support a funding level as close as possible to last
year’s Senate proposal of $ 318 billion over six years.
We congratulate Congress for taking the important step last year of
directing all ethanol tax revenues to transportation and shifting the
burden of ethanol tax credits from the Highway Trust Fund to the
general fund. This action, combined with other changes to reduce
fuel tax evasion, was included in the American Jobs Creation Act of
2004 ( Public Law 108- 357). According to the Congressional Budget
Office, these changes will bring the Highway Trust Fund an addition-al
$ 20 billion over the next six years — including over $ 2 billion in
new funding to California.
Maintain Funding Guarantees for Highways and Transit
One of the most important policy provisions in TEA 21 was the pro-tection
of revenue from both the Highway Trust Fund and the general fund for both the highway and tran-sit
program. MTC strongly urges Congress to ensure that whatever the final funding level, all funding is
fully guaranteed. If the general fund share of transit funding is not guaranteed, transit systems will be left to
the vagaries of the appropriations process — and a fierce competition with other domestic priorities.
The Administration’s latest reauthorization proposal would fund the New Starts program mostly from
the general fund and the formula programs solely from the Mass Transit Account. This will protect the
solvency of the Mass Transit Account, which is threatened by an accounting problem that results from
split funding of the transit formula programs ( i. e., funding programs from both the general fund and the
Mass Transit Account). While certainly feasible, this solution must be accompanied by a guarantee of the
general fund’s share or it will jeopardize the future of the New Starts program.
Preserve the Flexibility and the Program Structure of TEA 21
The basic program structure enacted in the
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act ( ISTEA) and TEA 21 has worked well for
over a decade. In particular, the flexibility of
the Surface Transportation Program ( STP)
and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Qual-ity
( CMAQ) program funds has been critical
in addressing the Bay Area’s diverse, multi-modal
needs. Indeed, a study by the Brook-ings
Institution in 2000 found that between
1992 and 1999, California “ flexed” 34 percent
- 8
- 7
- 6
- 5
- 4
- 3
- 2
- 1
0
Shortfall ( in billions of dollars)
Transit Rehabilitation
Local Road Rehabilitation
State Highway Rehabilitation
Transit Operations ( existing service)
Bay Area 25- Year Funding
Shortfalls
Bay Area 25- Year Funding
Shortfall
TEA 21 STP and CMAQ Program
Bay Area Total = $ 754 million
1
2
3
4
5
Percent
By Purpose of Total
1 Transit/ Road Rehab. 41%
2 Transit/ Road Expansion 25%
3 System Management 18%
4 Livable Communities 12%
5 Transit Operations 4%
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 5
of its available STP/ CMAQ funds to transit, or $ 3.7 billion, the largest amount of any state and the fifth-highest
percentage nationwide. This flexibility is empowering metropolitan areas to make investment
choices tailored to their own unique needs, and must be preserved in the next surface transportation act.
Since 1998, the Bay Area’s share of STP/ CMAQ dollars has funded:
• TransLink ® , our regional transit fare “ smart card”
• 511, the Bay Area’s traffic information service accessible on
the phone or the Web
• Revitalized neighborhoods near transit, through our award-winning
Transportation for Livable Communities program
Concentrate Funding Growth in the Core Formula Programs Consistent with the California Consen-sus
Principles endorsed by transportation interests throughout the state, MTC urges Congress to direct
new funding to the core highway and transit formula programs rather than creating new discretionary
programs. The core programs provide the greatest flexibility to states and metropolitan areas, ensuring
that federal funds are used where they are most needed.
Last year’s Senate Bill ( S. 1072) raised total funding by approximately 43 percent relative to TEA 21 guar-anteed
levels, while funding for the five core highway programs grew by an even greater 61 percent, as
shown in the chart below. By contrast, this year’s House bill ( H. R. 3) proposes to shift much of its addi-tional
funding into new discretionary programs, such as Projects of National/ Regional Significance. The
result is that while total funding in H. R. 3 increases by 35 percent over TEA 21, funding for the core
highway program would increase by only 19 percent, or roughly equivalent to the rate of inflation over
the six- year period.
6 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Comparison of House and Senate Core Program Funding
Increase Increase
TEA 21 S. 1072 Over TEA 21 H. R. 3 Over TEA 21
Interstate Maintenance Program $ 23,810 $ 38,000 60% $ 27,614 16%
National Highway System $ 28,571 $ 46,100 61% $ 33,137 16%
Bridge Program $ 20,430 $ 32,500 59% $ 23,695 16%
Surface Transportation Program $ 33,333 $ 47,900 44% $ 38,661 16%
Safety1 NA $ 7,900 NA $ 3,310 —
Congestion Mitigation/ Air Quality
Improvement Program $ 8,123 $ 12,050 48% $ 9,389 16%
Core Highway Program Total2 $ 114,266 $ 184,450 61% $ 135,805 19%
Total Guaranteed Funding3 $ 210,826 $ 301,087 43% $ 289,990 35%
1 In TEA 21, safety funding was provided as a 10% takedown from the Surface Transportation Program
2 Amounts do not include funds distributed back to the core program per the minimum guarantee formula.
3 Amounts include total obligation authority for transit and highway program.
Changes to the Minimum Guarantee Must Not Compromise on Scope MTC supports requiring that
the scope of the minimum guarantee capture all core highway program funding, as well as any new discre-tionary
programs. The scope of the minimum guarantee under TEA 21 applied to formula funds and High
Priority Projects, and covered approximately 93 percent of highway funding distributed to the states for con-struction
activities. However, last year’s House bill removed High Priority Projects and other new discre-tionary
programs from the scope, while increasing the percentage of the minimum guarantee from 90.5 per-cent
to 95 percent. The ultimate result was that the final guarantee would have applied to only 88 percent of
authorized highway funds. As of this writing, the House has not yet released any details on minimum guar-antee
for H. R. 3. However, it appears that the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Leader-ship
intends to broaden the scope back to TEA 21 levels. We heartily support this proposal and urge the Sen-ate
to insist upon it during conference committee.
Freight Funding Should Be Strategically Focused The nation’s freight needs may warrant a dedicated
program, given the huge infrastructure improvements necessary to meet the projected growth in truck
and rail traffic resulting from international trade. Should Congress opt to go this route, MTC recom-mends
that funding be focused on the states and localities most affected by goods movement, based on
specified criteria, such as container traffic volumes or proximity to ports.
Continue to Direct Transit Funding to the Most Congested Urban Areas
Without its extensive public transit system, the Bay Area would have far worse traffic congestion than it
does today. According to the Texas Transportation Institute, delay caused by traffic congestion would
grow by a whopping 60 percent, or 84 million hours a year. This makes sense when one considers that
BART carries as many people as an entire deck of the San Francisco- Oakland Bay Bridge during com-mute
hours. Federal support for the region’s public transit system helped to carry almost 480 million pas-senger
trips in FY 2002- 03, the most recent year for which data are available.
The current formulas for the federal transit program, which concentrate funding on transit systems that
carry the most passengers, should be retained. This ensures that federal dollars are spent where they are
needed most.
MTC also supports maintaining the current funding distribution between formula and capital programs:
40 percent Rail Modernization, 40 percent New Starts and 20 percent for Bus and Bus Facilities. We oppose
proposals to broaden the eligibility of the
New Starts program to non- fixed guideway
projects, unless such a proposal is accompa-nied
by a commensurate increase in funding
to absorb the resulting additional demand
for these funds.
TEA 21 provided the Bay Area with critical-ly
needed funds to maintain and expand
our transit infrastructure. With a mature
transit system in need of constant upkeep,
the Bay Area spent the vast majority of its
funds on rehabilitation, as shown in the
chart at right.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 7
2
3
TEA 21 FTA Formula Funding ( Section 5307 and 5309)
Bay Area Total = $ 1.4 billion
4
Percent
By Purpose of Total
1 Transit Rehabilitation 83%
2 Transit Expansion 6%
3 Transit System
Management 6%
4 Transit Operations 5%
1
Increase State Flexibility to Test the Benefits of User Fees
In order to provide the option of a congestion- free commute for both motorists and transit riders using
high- occupancy/ toll ( HOT) lanes, MTC supports a repeal of the current federal prohibition against tolls
on Interstate highways, as proposed in last year’s Senate bill. With special federal permission, Southern
California roadways, and highways in Texas and Virginia, have successfully implemented variable pricing
on HOT lanes. While TEA 21 included a Value Pricing Pilot Program that allowed for 15 demonstration
projects nationwide, current law maintains a general prohibition on tolling Interstate highways.
The toll provisions in H. R. 3 do not go far enough. They merely allow the Secretary of Transportation to
establish up to 25 projects nationwide, including any project already authorized under TEA 21. The con-tinuation
of the cap on the number of projects is overly restrictive, as are the eligible expenditures, which
are limited to capital improvements to the toll facility, debt service and return on investment to bond
holders. It is time to remove the general restriction and allow the toll revenues to be spent on both transit
and highway improvements along the toll corridor.
Overall, MTC supports the following tolling provisions in the reauthorization of TEA 21 that provide
needed flexibility for local project implementation:
• The federal prohibition on tolling on Interstates should be fully repealed.
• Tolls should be allowed for as long as they provide sufficient mobility benefits to the toll payers.
• Mass transit services and carpools should continue to have free access to HOT lanes.
• Transit capital and operating expenses should be an eligible expense.
• Conversion of carpool lanes to HOT lanes should not alter a region’s funding level for FTA
formula or fixed guideway modernization funding.
8 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
The San Francisco Bay Area is poised to develop
its own variable toll lane project on Interstate
680 between State Routes 84 and 237 in Alame-da
County. Traffic has significantly increased in
recent years along this 14- mile segment —
known as the Sunol Grade. A new carpool lane
was recently added but studies show that a high-occupancy
toll or “ HOT” lane will provide even
more benefits than a carpool- only lane and is
physically, operationally and financially feasible
on I- 680. Initial studies predict that the average
speeds in the HOT lanes during peak hours will
be 30 mph faster than in the regular freeway
lanes. Over a 20- year period, HOT lanes in both
directions along this segment are estimated to
generate a net revenue of $ 80 million, which
could be used for improvements along the corri-dor.
The project was initially authorized in
TEA 21 as a congestion pricing pilot project and
was recently given the green light in state law by
Chapter 418, Statutes of 2004 ( AB 2032, Dutra).
Interstate 15 HOT lanes in San Diego County
during the afternoon commute
SANDAG
Bay Area Demonstration Project: Interstate 680 Sunol Grade
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 9
Notes
10 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Section II
San Francisco Bay Area
FY2006 Funding Requests
San Francisco Bay Area’s Transit Expansion Program
Regional Agreements Key to the Bay Area’s Long Success in
Discretionary Transit Funding
MTC Resolution 1876: The Bay Area region’s first rail expansion program, adopted in 1988, was a
$ 4.1 billion undertaking, 70 percent of which was funded with state and local resources, to extend a total
of five rail lines. Two of these rail extensions were funded with federal New Starts funds authorized in
both the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 and the Transportation Equity Act for
the 21st Century ( TEA 21). The projects were the Bay Area Rapid Transit District ( BART) extension to
the San Francisco International Airport ( SFO) and an extension of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority ( VTA) Tasman light- rail line. The Tasman project was opened in December 1999, and the
BART- to- SFO project opened in June 2003.
MTC Resolution 3434: In December 2001, MTC adopted Resolution 3434, establishing the next genera-tion
of regional transit expansions. Following in the footsteps of its landmark predecessor, Resolution
3434 will continue the Bay Area’s approach of seeking federal discretionary funds with regional consensus
and a local funding overmatch of 80% non- federal revenue. Resolution 3434 identifies nine new rail
extensions, only two of which are seeking federal New Starts funds — San Francisco Muni’s Third Street
Light- Rail Phase 2/ New Central Subway and the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor.
Resolution 3434 included support for highway funding requests: At the time of the passage of Reso-lution
3434, the region recognized that the transit expansion program largely served central and south-ern
areas of the region, and not the four northern Bay Area counties ( Marin, Napa, Solano and Sono-ma).
At the same time, MTC expressed regional support for High Priority Project Program funding
requests in TEA 21 reauthorization for the following highway projects in these four counties as part of
the adoption of Resolution 3434: the Interstate 680/ Interstate 80 interchange, the Jamieson Canyon Road
project, and the U. S. Highway 101 Marin/ Sonoma Novato Narrows project.
12 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 13
Resolution 3434: Map of Projects
San
Francisco
San Jose
Oakland
780
580
80 680
880
80
505
5
205
580
580
880
280
101
101
101
680
12
12
12
113
12
160
242
85
35
9
1
29 121
121
37
29
4
116
24
13
238
61
221
4
84
17
152
130
25
84
82
87
1
92
237
to Healdsburg to Sacramento
to Stockton
to Gilroy
A l a m e d a
C o n t r a
C o s t a
S o l a n o
N a p a
S a c r a m e n t S a n
J o a q u i n
S a n S a n t a C r u z
M a r i n
S a n
M a t e o
S a n t a
C l a r a
San
Jose
101
101
VTAVTA
VTAVTA
San Jose
International
Airport
ACE:
Increased service BART: Warm Springs
to San Jose extension
Valley Transportation
Authority ( VTA)
light- rail/ bus rapid transit:
Downtown/ East Valley
extensions
Caltrain:
Rapid rail/ electrification
San Jose Rail Detail
San Francisco Rail Detail
MuniMuni
BART
101
80
Caltrain:
Downtown
SFextension/
Transbay
Terminal
Muni: Third St.
Corridor light- rail
transit/ central subway
MuniMuni
BART
VTAVTA
VTAVTA
BART
BART
Capitol Corridor:
Increased service and stations
Capitol Corridor:
Increased service
and stations
Altamont Commuter
Express ( ACE):
Increased service
ACE:
Increased
service
Sonoma- Marin rail
( A portion of the
Northwestern Pacific
rail line)
BART: East Contra
Costa extension
BART: Tri- Valley
extension
BART: Oakland
Airport connector
BART: Fremont to
Warm Springs extension
BART: Warm Springs to
San Jose extension
Caltrain:
Express service
Caltrain: Rapid rail /
electrification
Dumbarton
Rail
Caltrain: Rapid rail /
electrification
Oakland
International
Airport
San Francisco
International
Airport
San Jose
International
Airport
MTC/ pb — 2/ 19/ 04
Legend
Muni light rail — existing
Muni light- rail extension
Caltrain extension
BART — existing
BART extension
Sonoma- Marin rail
Express bus route
AC Transit rapid bus
VTA light- rail extension
VTA light rail — existing
/ Caltrain / service upgrade
/ Ferry — existing / proposed
/ ACE / service upgrade
/ Amtrak Capitols / service upgrade
Total: $ 11.8 billion ( 2004 $)
Local Funds $ 5.9 billion
State Funds $ 1.8 billion
Federal Funds $ 1.7 billion
Regional Funds $ 1.4 billion
Shortfall $ 981 million
State Funds
( 15%)
Local Funds
( 50%)
Federal
Funds
( 14%)
Regional
Funds
( 12%)
Shortfall
( 8%)
Resolution 3434: Map of Projects
Note: Percentages do not sum due to rounding
The San Francisco Bay Area’s New Starts Program
FY 2006 Funding Requests
• BART Extension to San Francisco International Airport:
$ 82.7 million to reimburse BART for completed construction. This is the Bay Area’s top
New Starts priority, and regional support for funding of remaining projects is subject to
fulfilling the final installment of BART’s Full Funding Grant Agreement.
• San Francisco Muni Third Street Light- Rail Transit Phase 2/ Central Subway:
$ 20 million for preliminary engineering
• Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor:
$ 10 million for preliminary engineering
BART Extension to San Francisco International Airport
BART opened its extension to San Francisco International Airport in June 2003 to lower- than- expected rid-ership
levels due to the lingering effects of the region’s economic recession. With the economy on the mend
in FY 2005, the extension is on track to carry 10 percent more riders than the prior fiscal year. The 8.7- mile
addition to the existing 95 miles of BART tracks includes new stations in South San Francisco, San Bruno
and Millbrae as well as San Francisco International Airport. It brings rail rapid transit to the region’s gateway
to the Pacific Rim, and makes possible regional rail travel through a convenient, cross- platform transfer with
Caltrain, an 80- mile commuter rail line from San Francisco through San Jose to Gilroy, serving the Silicon
Valley. With the extension complete, San Francisco joins the list of world- class cities that have direct rail
access to their airports.
BART BART
John A. Benson BART
The completed BART/ Caltrain intermodal station in Millbrae ( left) and the BART- SFO airport station ( right) are growing in popularity.
14 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
The San Francisco Bay Area’s New Starts Program
( continued)
Muni Third Street Light- Rail Transit ( LRT) Phase 2/ Central Subway
Authorized for funding in TEA 21, the Third Street
light- rail transit ( LRT) line is a two- phase project that
will connect long isolated lower- income communities in
southeastern San Francisco to the city’s established civic,
business, retail and cultural centers. Once open, the
light- rail line is expected to provide over 60,000 trips per
day. The project will bring improved travel time, access,
reliability, passenger comfort and transit connections in
the Third Street corridor.
Phase 1 ( Initial Operating Segment) will extend light-rail
service 5.4 miles south from its current terminus
near the SBC Park at Fourth and King streets, providing
19 new stops. The line will ultimately terminate at an intermodal station, allowing passengers to easily
transfer to the Caltrain commuter rail system. Construction of this phase of the light- rail project is 85%
complete, and the line is expected to open for service in winter 2005– 06.
Phase 2 ( Central Subway) will add 1.7 miles of light- rail
track and take Third Street trains from Fourth and King
underground to Union Square and Chinatown. A total
of four subway stations and one surface station will be
built. Congress has awarded $ 20.5 million in New Starts
funds through FY 2005 for this work and the project
received a “ recommended” rating in the Federal Transit
Administration’s FY 2006 Annual New Starts Report.
Phase 2 is currently in preliminary engineering and is
expected to open for service in 2012.
The Third Street LRT project is supported by a financial
plan that includes a significant amount of state and local funding. Funding for Phase 1 includes over $ 500
million in state and local funds; Phase 2 will seek $ 472 million ( in 2004 dollars) in federal New Starts funds
to combine with $ 222 million in state and local funds. New Starts funds will comprise 37 percent of overall
project funding, with non- federal ( state and local) funds providing most of the remaining share. Project
costs in millions of 2004 dollars are as follows:
Source of Capital Funds Percent of Total
( in millions 2004 $) Phase 1 Phase 21 Total Project Cost
Local Sales Tax Funds $ 341 $ 126* $ 467 37%
State Funds 190* 96 286 22%
Federal New Starts Funds 0 472 472 37%
Other Federal Funds 54 0 54 4%
Total $ 585 $ 694 $ 1,279 100%
1 The preliminary revised cost for the Muni Third Street Light Rail Phase 2/ Central Subway per the FY 2006 FTA Annual New Starts Report is
$ 865 million in 2004$. Confirmation of an updated cost is pending selection of a new locally preferred alternative in Spring 2005. The cost
shown above is from MTC’s long- range Transportation 2030 Plan.
* State/ local fund swap
Muni Third Street LRT- Phase 1, Bayshore Boulevard in
Visitacion Valley
San Francisco Muni
Proposed new Central Subway tunnel
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 15
San Francisco Muni
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Silicon Valley Rapid
Transit Corridor
Authorized for New Starts funding
in TEA 21, the BART extension to
Silicon Valley represents the last link
needed to complete the connection
of all of the region’s rail systems
around San Francisco Bay.
The extension will parallel Interstates
880 and 680, two of the major
north- south regional corridors serv-ing
the Silicon Valley.
The project consists of a 16.3- mile,
seven- station extension of BART
south from a planned, Warm
Springs station in the city of Fre-mont
in Alameda County, through
the city of Milpitas and downtown
San Jose, to the Caltrain commuter
rail station in the city of Santa Clara.
A request to enter into preliminary
engineering was approved by the
FTA in the fall of 2002. Congress has
awarded the project $ 4.7 million in
New Starts funding to date.
The total cost for the project in
2004 dollars is estimated at $ 4.1 billion. Almost 80
percent of this amount has already been secured
from state and local sources. In 2000, California
enacted the statewide Traffic Congestion Relief
Program, which contributed $ 649 million to the
project. Also, in November 2000, the residents of
Santa Clara County approved more than $ 2 bil-lion
toward the project through Measure A, a half-cent
sales tax for transportation purposes. The
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority has
acknowledged the need for another voter-approved
sales tax to provide additional capital
and operating funding for the project.
New Starts funds will comprise only 21 percent
of overall project funding, making the project a
significant overmatch candidate. MTC’s estimate
of project costs in 2004 dollars are as follows:
The San Francisco Bay Area’s New Starts Program
( continued)
XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXX
XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX
XXXX
280
82
237
17
237
SAN JOSE
SANTA
CLARA
MILPITAS
SUNNYVALE
87
Santa Clara County
Alameda County
237
880
Warm Springs ( Planned)
1 mile
Scale in Miles
0
N
Auto Mall
280
680
680
880
680
82 87
880
880
South Calaveras
( Future)
Montague/ Capitol
Alum Rock
Civic Plaza/ SJSU
Market St.
Santa Clara
Diridon/ Arena
Berryessa
XXXX
San Jose
International Airport
San Jose
State Univ.
Santa Clara
University
Caltrain
Vasona LRT
Capitol LRT
Guadalupe LRT
Arena
San Fancisco Bay
National Wildlife Refuge
Tasman East LRT
Civic
Center
Julian St
Montague Expwy
Landess Ave
Alum Rock
Ave
Santa Clara St
Mckee Rd
Berryessa Rd
Hostetter Rd
Mabury Rd
Dixon Landing Rd
Jacklin Rd
Great Mall PkwyTrade
Zone
Blvd
ACE & Capitol Trains
Calaveras Blvd
SJIA
People Mover
Warm Springs Blvd.
101
101
Paramount's
Great America
Great Mall
Civic
Center
UPRR
Legend 2:
At- Grade ( Surface/ Ground Level)
Retained Fill or Aerial
Retained Cut ( Trench)
Downtown San Jose
BART Tunnel
Alignment or Station
Design Option
Proposed BART Operations &
Maintenance Facility
Legend 1:
Proposed Altamont Commuter Express
( ACE) Train Station
Future BART Station Location
Proposed BART Station
BART Intermodal Transfer Center
Existing & Future Key VTA Light Rail
Transit ( LRT) Stations
Caltrain Station
ACE or Caltrain Intermodal Transfer Center
San Jose International Airport People Mover
BART Extension to Warm Springs
BART EXTENSION TO MILPITAS, SAN JOSE AND SANTA CLARA
16 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Revenue Source Amount ( in millions 2004 $) Percent
Local Sales Tax and other funds $ 2,611 63%
State Funds 649 16%
Federal New Starts Funds 889 21%
Total $ 4,149 100%
Bus and Ferry Transit Expansion
Rapid Bus Expansion Is Integral
To a Balanced System
The Bay Area’s new regional transit expansion
program includes a significant express bus and
bus rapid transit element. MTC supports discre-tionary
Section 5309 funding or funding from the
High Priority Projects Program for AC Transit
Rapid Bus projects in the Berkeley/ Oakland/
San Leandro and the Hesperian/ Foothill/
MacArthur corridors.
By applying state- of- the- art Rapid Bus improve-ments
to these corridors, AC Transit will greatly
enhance mobility and accessibility for the over
500,000 residents who live within one- quarter mile
of the corridors, 67 percent of whom are transit
dependent, and will assist in revitalizing these
densely populated urban areas.
Ferryboat Discretionary Funding
Should Be Increased
MTC joins the American Public Transportation
Association in seeking increased funding for the
Ferryboat Discretionary Program. We support the
language in the House bill, H. R. 3, to increase guar-anteed
funding for the Ferry Boat Discretionary
( FBD) program from the current $ 38 million to
$ 75 million per year. We also are very supportive of
efforts by Senators Patty Murray and Barbara Boxer
to increase funding for the FBD to $ 120 million
annually. The Bay Area’s ferry system is already the
fourth- largest urban commute ferry system in the
country, behind New York, New Jersey and Seattle.
Ferry transit will become even more attractive as traffic congestion increases on Bay Area roads and
bridges, and convenient and reliable public transit alternatives are sought. Recognizing this, the state
Legislature created the San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority ( WTA), to develop a comprehen-sive
plan to expand the Bay Area’s ferry system. In 2004, Bay Area voters approved a $ 1 toll increase on
our seven state- owned toll bridges which provides a substantial infusion of dedicated funds for ferries.
Additional federal funds would allow the capital improvements needed to maximize waterborne trans-portation
in the Bay Area.
AC Transit Rapid Bus service along San Pablo Avenue has
decreased travel time in the 14- mile corridor by 17 percent
and increased ridership by 35 percent.
High- speed ferry operated by Golden Gate Bridge,
Highway and Transportation District
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 17
GGBHTD AC Transit
Federal Transit Administration
Discretionary Programs
Bus and Bus Facilities Program
FTA Section 5309
These requests assume the continuation of the Bus and Bus Facilities Program in the new federal transportation bill, which
MTC supports. This program provides a vital source of revenue for the region’s growing bus service. Bay Area project sponsors,
in partnership with MTC, are seeking the following funding from the FTA discretionary programs.
Sponsor Project Amount
AC Transit Bus Rapid Transit Corridor $ 6,000,000
AC Transit seeks funding for capital improvements along the Telegraph Avenue/ International Boulevard/ East 14th Street Bus
Rapid Transit Corridor. This is consistent with MTC’s Regional Transit Expansion Policy ( Resolution 3434), which identified AC
Transit’s Bus Rapid Transit Corridors project as the region’s top priority for Section 5309 bus funds.
Sponsor Project Amount
Eastern Contra Costa Transit Park- and- ride lots $ 2,400,000
Authority ( Tri Delta Transit)
Tri Delta requests funds to purchase land and make improvements to park- and- ride lots serving the eastern towns and cities of
Contra Costa County, including Antioch, Bethel Island, Brentwood, Byron, Discovery Bay, Knightsen and Oakley. These lots will
be the origin/ destination point for trips heading west to the greater San Francisco Bay Area, south to the Livermore and Silicon
valleys, or to the Amtrak station.
Sponsor Project Amount
Livermore/ Amador Valley Transit Maintenance/ Operations Facility $ 1,200,000
Authority ( LAVTA); County Connection
The Livermore/ Amador Valley Transit Authority requests funds to develop nine acres of land for a bus storage and maintenance
facility that would be shared with the County Connection, bringing about significant cost savings.
Sponsor Project Amount
MTC Ed Roberts Campus $ 5,000,000
MTC requests funds to help build a model intermodal transit center on the parking lot of the Ashby BART station in Berkeley
for people with disabilities. The facility will have state- of- the- art accessibility features, individualized travel information and one-stop
access to health, education and employment services and programs. The Ed Roberts Campus is a successful public/ private
partnership involving multiple nonprofit and public agencies as well as the private sector.
Sponsor Project Amount
San Mateo County Transit District ( SamTrans) Revenue Collection System $ 4,500,000
SamTrans requests funds to replace its outdated vehicle fareboxes with a more modern electronic system. The new equipment will
offer versatility and convenience to all customers by allowing payment of fares with credit cards and TransLink ® smart cards, as well
as cash. Transactions will be electronically recorded for more accurate counting, increased security, and protection against theft.
Sponsor Project Amount
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority New Paratransit Vehicles $ 1,500,000
The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority ( VTA) requests funds to purchase new vehicles to accommodate the increasing
demand for paratransit services provided by VTA in accordance with the federal Americans With Disabilities Act ( ADA).
Sponsor Project Amount
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Low- Floor Articulated Vehicles $ 2,300,000
VTA requests funds to purchase low- floor articulated buses to increase passenger capacity, relieve overcrowding conditions on
vehicles and enhance vehicle accessibility along VTA’s Line 22 bus route, the most heavily used route in VTA’s bus system.
18 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Sponsor Project Amount
Solano Transportation Authority and Fairfield/ Vacaville Train Station $ 2,500,000
the cities of Fairfield and Vacaville
Solano Transportation Authority and the cities of Fairfield and Vacaville jointly request funds to build a train station that would
integrate bus and train service, while providing enhanced bicycle and pedestrian access for the Fairfield and Vacaville communities.
Sponsor Project Amount
Solano Transportation Authority and Vallejo Station $ 4,000,000
Vallejo Transit
Solano Transportation Authority and Vallejo Transit request funds to assist in the construction of an intermodal transit hub at
its downtown/ waterfront redevelopment area. Expanded bus and ferry service will support high- density residential and mixed-use
development.
Sponsor Project Amount
West Contra Costa Transit Authority Over- the- road coach purchase $ 2,000,000
( WestCat)
The WestCAT requests funds to purchase four over- the- road coaches to provide express bus service along the heavily congested
Interstate 80, between Hercules and the San Francisco Transbay Terminal. The service will make use of the High- Occupancy-
Vehicle ( HOV) lane infrastructure already in place from Hercules to the Bay Bridge along I- 80.
Clean Fuels Program
These requests assume the continuation of the Clean Fuels Program in the new federal transportation bill. They are also
eligible for funding under the Bus and Bus Facilities Program but are listed here to emphasize their focus on clean fuel.
Sponsor Project Amount
San Francisco Islais Creek Maintenance Facility $ 5,000,000
Municipal Railway ( Muni)
Muni has embarked on an alternative fuels implementation program to reduce pollution and improve air quality for all residents
of the Bay Area. Muni requests funds to implement this project, including modifications to the future Islais Creek maintenance
facility. The facility will include parking for 135 Muni buses, and buildings for operations and maintenance personnel, service
bays, and vehicle fueling and washing.
Sponsor Project Amount
San Francisco Hybrid Bus Procurement $ 2,000,000
Municipal Railway ( Muni)
Muni requests funds to purchase hybrid vehicles to replace its 56 forty- foot diesel buses with hybrid vehicles. These vehicles will
be maintained at the above- described Islais Creek facility.
Sponsor Project Amount
San Mateo County Transit District/ Santa Zero- Emission Bus $ 400,000
Clara Valley Transportation Authority ( VTA) Demonstration Program
The San Mateo County Transit District and VTA jointly request $ 400,000 in funds to launch a fuel cell demonstration program.
This innovative program will test the viability of hydrogen- powered fuel cell vehicles in day- to- day transit service.
Sponsor Project Amount
Sonoma County Transit Purchase eight compressed natural gas ( CNG) coaches $ 2,200,000
Sonoma County Transit requests funding for the replacement of eight 40- foot compressed natural gas ( CNG) powered transit
coaches. This project will begin replacement of Sonoma County Transit's first generation CNG coaches when fully depreciated
per FTA guidelines. Over 95 percent of Sonoma County Transit's heavy- duty bus fleet is powered by natural gas.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 19
20 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Jobs Access and Reverse Commute Program
By creating the federal Jobs Access and Reverse Commute ( JARC) program, TEA 21 provided a funding program to address
the transportation- related mandates included in the 1996 federal welfare reform legislation. Since the passage of this leg-islation,
MTC has adopted a regional welfare- to- work transportation plan based on those developed by individual coun-ties.
The Transportation 2030 Plan identifies transportation barriers welfare recipients face in transitioning from welfare
to work, and recommends projects that will reduce or eliminate these barriers.
Sponsor Project Amount
AC Transit Bus Service $ 6,000,000
AC Transit seeks funds for bus service to continue to provide job access and welfare- to- work transit that has been implemented
under past competitive JARC grants and direct appropriations.
Sponsor Project Amount
Central Contra Costa Monument Corridor Access to Health Care $ 800,000
Transportation Authority
The Central Contra Costa Transportation Authority ( County Connection) requests funds to develop and operate a bus route
that will provide direct service from the Monument Corridor in Concord to key medical facilities and Diablo Valley College so
that parents can get children to health care without having to take a full day off work to do so; provide transportation to health
care jobs at key medical facilities; and provide transportation to health care career training programs at Diablo Valley College in
Pleasant Hill.
Sponsor Project Amount
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Guaranteed Ride Program $ 400,000
Authority/ County of Santa Clara
To assist welfare recipients with their transition to employment, Santa Clara VTA seeks funds to provide CalWORKS recipients
with a guaranteed ride when their regular transportation mode is not available. By serving as a transportation safety net, the
program enables CalWORKS recipients to avoid mobility problems that could harm their ability to stay employed.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 21
Federal Highway Administration
Discretionary Programs
Federal Highway Administration
Discretionary Programs
TEA 21 created 12 special discretionary programs within the Federal Highway Administration ( FHWA), each with its own
eligibility and selection criteria. Assuming the continuation of these programs in the successor to TEA 21, Bay Area pro-ject
sponsors, in partnership with MTC, are seeking funding from the following FHWA discretionary programs:
• Bridge Discretionary
• Intelligent Transportation Systems
• Public Lands Highways
Bridge Discretionary
Replacement, rehabilitation or seismic retrofit of major bridges
Sponsor Project Amount
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway Golden Gate Bridge $ 25,000,000
and Transportation District seismic retrofit
The Golden Gate Bridge is a world- renowned engineering masterpiece, a major 20th century American achievement, and a symbol
of the state of California to millions across the country and the world.
Casting a shadow on this symbol, however, is its vulnerability to earthquakes. To make the bridge seismically safe, a retrofit pro-gram
costing approximately $ 402 million — a bargain compared to an estimated $ 2.1 billion to build a new structure — is now
under way. This project includes strengthening and tuning the structure to withstand an 8.3 magnitude earthquake — a maximum
credible event. Retrofit mea-sures
will be applied to the
concrete piers, the towers and
to the approach structures.
Discretionary federal invest-ment
in project construction
currently totals $ 100 million.
State funds in the amount of
$ 50 million as well as $ 71
million in local toll funds
have been committed to the
project to date. In 2000, MTC
committed $ 26 million of
flexible TEA 21 funds gener-ated
by the Revenue Aligned
Budget Authority dividend to
this project.
22 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
• Transportation and Community and
System Preservation Pilot Program
Golden Gate Bridge
GGBHTD
Intelligent Transportation Systems
Under TEA 21, the Intelligent Transportation System ( ITS) program provided for the research, development and opera-tional
testing of system management technologies aimed at reducing congestion, improving safety, increasing the operat-ing
efficiencies in transit and commercial vehicles, and reducing the environmental impact of growing travel demand.
Sponsor Project Amount
AC Transit Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Technology $ 2,000,000
AC Transit requests funds to upgrade technology to improve customer information, increase operational efficiency and decrease
travel time along critical Bus Rapid Transit corridors.
Sponsor Project Amount
Caltrain Train Tracking Information System $ 3,000,000
Caltrain requests funds to develop a global positioning system- based train tracking system to provide real- time train location
and arrival information to passengers waiting at station platforms. The information will be available from visual messaging
signs and the digital public address systems at Caltrain stations. The system also will monitor actual versus scheduled arrival
times at every station to help improve on- time performance.
Sponsor Project Amount
Port of Oakland Integrated freight ITS public/ private partnership $ 5,750,000
The Port of Oakland, in partnership with the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, Bay Area World Trade Center
and MTC, requests funds to integrate and expand the 511 traffic information system and East Bay Smart Corridors program to
give freight haulers direct access to current traffic information on Bay Area freeways, local parallel arterials and Port of Oakland
roadways; expand incident management coverage along I- 880; provide access to various “ bulletin boards” for tracking and
reserving empty containers; and provide pick up/ delivery appointments at the Port.
Sponsor Project Amount
San Francisco Municipal SFgo- Intelligent Transportation $ 2,000,000
Transportation Authority ( SFMTA) System Integration
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority seeks ITS funds for its SFgo Program, a citywide transportation management
system that will gather real- time information on current traffic flow and congestion on local streets, process and analyze this infor-mation,
respond to changes in roadway conditions, and provide traveler information to the public. This project includes building
the communications network, software enhancements and development of operations, training and maintenance procedures.
Public Lands Highways
Any transportation project eligible for federal highway assistance that is within, adjacent to, or provides access to federal
public land areas
Sponsor Project Amount
Marin County Access Improvements to Golden Gate National Recreation Area $ 2,000,000
Marin County requests funds to construct a multimodal transfer and parking facility at the Manzanita interchange ( State Route
1 and U. S. 101) and development of a shuttle bus system serving visitors to Golden Gate National Recreation Area sites along the
State Route 1 corridor in Marin County.
Sponsor Project Amount
City and County of San Francisco Doyle Drive Replacement $ 5,000,000
Traversing Presidio National Park, Doyle Drive is the primary route from San Francisco to the Golden Gate Bridge and the
northern counties of Marin and Sonoma. This funding will enable completion of detailed engineering for construction of this
roadway, which will facilitate direct transit service into the Presidio. The funding would complement $ 230 million in local and
state funding commitments to the project.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 23
Transportation and Community and System Preservation
Pilot Program
Provides funding to state and local governments to develop innovative strategies that use transportation resources to build
livable communities
Sponsor Project Amount
Contra Costa County North Richmond Circulation $ 1,000,000
Improvement Project
Contra Costa County requests funds for planning, community outreach, engineering, environmental clearance and construction
of two projects in North Richmond: a pedestrian/ bicycle overcrossing of two sets of railroad tracks and development of a new
road system to provide truck access between businesses and Richmond Parkway.
Sponsor Project Amount
Marin County Coyote Creek Bridge Replacement $ 2,000,000
Marin County requests funds to replace the Coyote Creek Bridge, consistent with the joint Marin County/ National Park Service
comprehensive transportation plan for public lands along State Route 1. The new bridge will improve access to an existing trail
beneath the bridge for pedestrians, equestrians, and bicyclists and will provide increased lane capacity on the bridge itself to
accommodate heavy traffic along State Route 1.
24 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Section III
Delivering Services and
Connecting Communities
Transportation 2030:
Mobility for the Next Generation
MTC recently updated the Bay Area’s long- range transportation plan — Transportation 2030 — a
comprehensive roadmap to guide the development of mass transit, highway, airport, seaport, bicycle
and pedestrian facilities over the next 25 years.
The Bay Area’s surface transportation system is poorly maintained,
seriously overcrowded at peak hours and woefully underfunded. These
conditions have been decades in the making and cannot be reversed
overnight. But they can be changed.
MTC’s Transportation 2030 Plan charts a 25- year course for trans-forming
the Bay Area’s transportation system and fulfilling a vision in
which potholes on the streets are rare exceptions; in which the
region’s bridges prove mightier than the strongest earthquake; in
which real- time information about conditions on every highway
and transit route in the region is available on demand; and in which
carefully selected additions — including the Resolution 3434 tran-sit
extensions and unclogging notorious highway bottlenecks like
the Caldecott Tunnel, the Novato Narrows and the Cordelia Junc-tion
— are made to the Bay Area transportation network.
A trio of investment themes forms the framework around the plan:
adequate maintenance, system efficiency and strategic expansion.
The 2030 Plan shows how these themes translate into invest-ments
in specific programs and projects. Some 60 “ Calls to
Action” envision how MTC — together with the Bay Area
public and local, state and federal decision- makers — can
advance these programs and projects by mining a new fund-ing
source, enacting a new law or eliminating an impedi-ment
to progress. A sampling includes:
• Conditioning local road maintenance and transit
rehabilitation funds to ensure maintenance of effort
and efficiencies
• Strengthening Proposition 42 ( the measure dedicat-ing
gasoline sales tax revenues to transportation) so
that it cannot be routinely suspended
• Pursuing functional consolidation or institutional
merging of transit operators
• Indexing the gas tax to inflation A Transportation 2030 stakeholder weighs in
Peter Beeler
26 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
• Encouraging community- based planning and investments
for transit- dependent populations
• Implementing a coordinated, regional system of transit
transfer hubs
• Conditioning transit expansion funds on supportive
land uses
• Launching a regional High- Occupancy/ Toll ( HOT) lane
network
The Transportation 2030 Plan also establishes several new fund-ing
programs, including a new Lifeline Mobility Program to
improve access to transportation services in low- income com-munities,
a Regional Bicycle/ Pedestrian program and a Regional
Freeway Operations program.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 27
Transportation 2030 Plan
Expenditures
Financially Constrained Element
1
3
4
5
6
7
8 9
Billions Percent
of Dollars of Total
Adequate Maintenance
1 Transit $ 61 51%
2 Highway $ 10 9%
3 Local Roads $ 23 20%
System Efficiency
4 Transit $ 2 1%
5 Highway $ 1 1%
6 Local Roads $ 2 2%
Strategic Expansion
7 Transit $ 13 11%
8 Highway $ 5 4%
9 Local Roads $ 1 1%
Total $ 118 100%
2
Source: MTC travel forecasts
and ABAG Projections 2003
Regional Demographic and Transportation Indicators
Bay Area Total in 2030 and Percent Change from 2000
Population 8,780,000
Mean Household Income ( 2000$) $ 118,000
Employed Residents ( workers) 4,983,000
Employment ( jobs) 5,226,000
Workers From Outside Area ( net in- commute) 220,000
Developed Land ( acres) 887,500
Total Daily Trips 28,493,000
Daily Auto Trips 23,584,000
Daily Transit Trips ( linked trips) 1,870,000
Commercial Vehicle Trips ( trucks) 4,655,000
Nonmotorized Trips 3,040,000
Daily Vehicle Miles of Travel 200,878,000
Average Commute Duration ( minutes) 31.1
Average Commute Distance ( miles) 11.9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
P E R C E N T C H A N G E
Transportation 2030 public outreach meeting
Joyce Benna
Projected 25- Year Revenues
Financially Constrained Element
1
2
3
4
Billions Percent
of Dollars of Total
1 Local $ 75 64%
2 Regional $ 16 13%
3 State $ 14 12%
4 Federal $ 13 11%
Total $ 118 100%
System Efficiency: Squeezing Better
Mileage from Existing Resources
In an era of limited resources, MTC has placed a priority on a series of successful programs that make
it easier, safer and more convenient to use the Bay Area’s existing transportation network to get around
— whether by car, transit, bike or foot.
‰ Bay Area Tollpayers Get on the FasTrak ™
Acting as the Bay Area Toll Authority, MTC in early 2004 assumed responsibility from Caltrans for operation
of the FasTrak ™ system on the region’s seven state- owned toll bridges. To promote electronic toll collection,
MTC gave FasTrak ™ users a four- month reprieve from the $ 1 toll hike that went into effect July 1, 2004 fol-lowing
voters’ approval of the Regional Measure 2 traffic relief program.
The temporary toll discount, plus aggressive mar-keting,
online enrollment and an expanded number
of FasTrak ™ - only lanes, sparked an unprecedented
enrollment surge, with the number of FasTrak ™
accounts jumping by more than 80,000, or nearly
40 percent, in the six months from May 1 through
October 31. This resulted in a corresponding
increase in FasTrak ™ traffic on Bay Area bridges.
MTC is now working with the Golden Gate Bridge,
Highway and Transportation District to create a sin-gle
regional center that will merge the FasTrak ™
customer service centers for the state- owned bridges
and the Golden Gate Bridge. The Regional Fas-
Trak ™ Customer Service Center is expected to be in
operation in summer 2005
‰ TransLink ® Moves into Full Swing
The TransLink ® transit- fare smart card is the thread that will stitch together the Bay Area’s nearly two dozen
transit systems into a seamless, passenger- friendly network. A proven success through a test phase that began in
2002, TransLink ® has been approved for installation by AC Transit, BART, Caltrain, Golden Gate Transit, San
Francisco Muni and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. Full system installation begins in late 2005.
The powerful, versatile and distinctive TransLink ® card:
• Eliminates the need for exact change and/ or multiple transit passes
• Automatically grants transfers and calculates appropriate discounts
• Improves service planning, marketing and financial accounting
• Allows faster boarding
28 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
FasTrak ® lanes at Carquinez Bridge
Caltrans
‰ Travel Information As Easy As 5- 1- 1
MTC’s award- winning 511 traveler information service is a joint effort with Cal-trans,
the California Highway Patrol and dozens of other partners to provide cur-rent,
on- demand information 24/ 7 — via phone or Web — on traffic conditions;
transit routes, fares and schedules; and bicycling and carpool/ vanpool options.
The toll- free service is a hit with Bay Area travelers, receiving its 5 millionth
phone call in December 2004, just two years after the system’s debut.
The Bay Area 511 system — which generates more than 75,000 calls and
hundreds of thousands of Web hits each week — boasts a range of services
and innovations. Among the latest innovations is 511 Driving Times ™ , which uses several high- tech sys-tems
— including FasTrak ™ electronic toll collection transponders — to calculate current travel times
along the Bay Area freeway network. The 511 Transit page at
www. 511. org is home to the popular 511 transit trip plan-ning
and information service, which is accessed by more than
700,000 computers and generates more than 200,000 person-alized
trip itineraries each month.
The Bay Area 511 system was recognized last year by the
Intelligent Transportation Society of America as the “ Best
New Product, Service or Application” for 2003. It also
received a 2003 California Department of Transportation
Award for transportation management, the 2003 Innovation
Award from the American Public Transportation Association,
and the Best Public Innovation and Best Partnership Awards from the California Alliance for Advanced
Transportation Systems.
‰ Freeway Service Patrol Aids Stranded Motorists
The Bay Area Freeway Service Patrol ( FSP) is a special team of 74 trucks
that patrols more than 450 miles of the region’s most congested freeways.
Since roughly half of all congestion is incident- related, timely response to
accidents and stalled vehicles translates into significant time savings for
motorists. The FSP is financed with federal, state and local monies. Local
funds come from the MTC Service Authority for Freeways and Express-ways
( SAFE), which is financed by a $ 1 annual vehicle registration fee in
participating counties.
‰ Call Box Service Offers a Safety Net
In partnership with the California
Highway Patrol and Caltrans, MTC
operates some 2,600 call boxes on
more than 1,100 miles of highways
and expressways in the Bay Area,
allowing motorists to report a road
hazard, flat tire or mechanical
breakdown.
Rachel Garcia, 511’ s five
millionth caller
Peter Beeler
The 511 Transit Web page
“ Yesterday morning I blew my left
rear tire, and was stranded on the
freeway when a guardian angel by
the name of Steve stopped to assist
me… I can’t tell you how much I
appreciated his assistance.
Thank you again for having this
wonderful service”
— Voicemail received 10- 20- 04
FSP provided more than
135,000 assists in 2004.
George Draper
Some 3,000 motorists each month take advan-tage
of the Bay Area’s roadside call boxes.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 29
Smart Growth Initiatives:
Community Focus Sharpens Vision
MTC’s smart growth initiatives provide direct financial incentives for cities and counties to make land-use
decisions that support infill and transit- oriented development.
‰ Transportation for Livable Communities/ Housing Incentive Program
MTC has invested close to $ 75 million to date in strengthening the link between transportation and land- use
decisions. And the Commission recently pledged to triple the annual funding levels for the ground- breaking
program described below.
MTC’s Transportation for Livable Communities ( TLC) program provides grants to community- oriented
transportation projects that bolster land use/ transportation integration. To date, TLC has:
• Awarded 67 planning grants of up to $ 75,000 per
project for community planning and technical
assistance support
• Awarded 70 capital grants of up to $ 3 million per
project for the design and construction of pedes-trian-,
bicycle- and transit- oriented projects
Building on the success of its TLC Program, MTC
launched the Housing Incentive Program ( HIP) to
provide project funds as seed money for local juris-dictions
that provide new compact housing near
existing transit facilities. HIP grants are keyed to
project densities — the more units per acre, the
higher the grant amount, with affordable units
earning a bonus.
A “ Bottom- Up” Approach
MTC’s effort to better integrate transportation and
land- use planning in the Bay Area also is moving
forward through a joint initiative with the region’s
county congestion management agencies ( CMAs).
Known as Transportation Planning and Land- Use
Solutions ( or T- PLUS for short), the project pro-vides
financial support to CMAs to explore ways
their county can support or benefit from:
• County- level TLC and HIP initiatives
The Fruitvale Transit Village BART Station has become a model
for successful transit- oriented development.
30 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Evelyn Johnson Annie Young
Before
After
• Implementing the
recommendations of
the Smart Growth Strategy/
Regional Livability Footprint
project
• Pursuing development that
supports MTC’s Regional Transit
Expansion Program
• Programs to mitigate transportation-related
impacts on the environment ( includ-ing
local ordinances, countywide impact fees
or mitigation banks)
Regional Solutions
In December 2003, as part of MTC’s long- range
planning effort known as Transportation 2030, the
Commission adopted a five- point platform to forge
even stronger connections between transportation and
land- use decisions. The platform pledges to:
• Condition discretionary funding for MTC’s Resolution
3434 Regional Transit Expansion Program on the provi-sion
of supportive land uses in nearby transit corridors and
stations
• Supplement MTC’s neighborhood- oriented TLC and HIP ini-tiatives
with planning incentives that support a broader set of
land- use objectives, such as specific plans for transit- oriented
and infill development
• Support improved transportation/ land- use development
outside of major transit commute corridors
• Better coordinate transportation and land- use planning with adjoining regions such as the
Central Valley and greater Sacramento area
The 16th/ Mission BART station received a TLC grant to make these improvements which make the BART station area an integral
part of the community.
Before
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 31
Clark Wilson, Community Desihn + Architecture
BART
TLC Capital Projects
HIP Projects
TLC Planning Projects
TLC Capital Projects
HIP Projects
TLC Planning Projects
Over the past five years, MTC has allocated
more than $ 2.7 million in TLC planning grants
and committed more than $ 70 million for TLC
capital and HIP projects around the Bay Area.
After
MTC Grants Promote Smart Growth
Equitable Access to Transportation: Extending
The Vision to Every Bay Area Community
MTC continues its efforts to advance mobility and enhance well- being for low- income, elderly and
disabled residents throughout the Bay Area.
‰ Lifeline Transportation Network
In adopting spending parameters for its 25- year Transportation 2030 Plan in
December 2003, MTC reserved $ 216 million in anticipated transit operating
funds as a “ down payment” for a Lifeline Transportation Network that serves
low- income, elderly and disabled residents. MTC is advocating for additional
operating funding to more fully cover the basic transportation needs of the
region’s most vulnerable populations, whether through fixed- route transit ser-vice,
carsharing, shuttles or other programs.
‰ Community Transportation Plans
Working in partnership with county congestion management agencies, com-munity
organizations and residents, MTC is funding community transporta-tion
plans in low- income areas around the Bay Area. These plans
will be used to inform planning and investment decisions at all lev-els
of government. The first plans were completed in 2004 in the
communities of Ashland/ Cherryland ( in unincorporated Alameda
County), Dixon, East Palo Alto, Napa, North Richmond/ San Pablo,
and South Hayward. The second round of planning is underway in
San Francisco’s Civic Center, San Rafael’s Canal District, Gilroy,
Cordelia and West Oakland. The goal of these plans is to identify
nontraditional solutions that can help plug the gap, where standard
transit service has fallen short.
Transportations solutions emerging form the
plans include children’s transportation services, vanpool services,
subsidized taxi service, car sharing and other
auto- related projects. Capital improvements
such as additional bus shelters or benches and
adjustments to fixed route transit.
AC Transit’s new “ low- floor”
buses ease wheelchair access.
Amy Franjesevic
A member of the community in Richmond ranks
her transportation concerns at an MTC- spon-sored
community meeting.
MTC Archives
Participants at an Ashland community open house suggest ways to
remove transportation barriers.
Nelson/ Wxgaard Consulting
32 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
‰ LIFT Program — Expanding Low- Income Residents’ Transportation Options
MTC initiated the Low- Income Flexible Transportation
( LIFT) program to address the challenge of improving trans-portation
services for low- income residents. This program,
which provides grants for welfare- to- work transportation
projects in the Bay Area, has been funded through a variety of
state and federal sources. To date, MTC has awarded $ 14 mil-lion
in LIFT funds to support 37 different projects in all nine
Bay Area Counties.
‰ Older Adults Transportation Study
To identify ways to maintain and improve travel options for
older adults in the Bay Area, MTC completed an Older Adults
Transportation Study in 2002. Anticipating the rapid growth of
the senior population, this effort identifies the barriers that
limit seniors’ mobility, especially obstacles to using public
transportation or other alternatives to driving. As a follow- up,
MTC compiled a Senior Mobility Toolkit in 2003 that high-lights
best practices in improving senior access to mobility.
‰ Next Steps
MTC will pursue several new initiatives focusing on the trans-portation
needs of low- income residents in the Bay Area. Emerg-ing
out of the recently completed long- range plan update, Trans-portation
2030, these initiatives include:
• Enhancing the collection of local demographic information to
better understand the travel needs of the lifeline population
• Examining barriers to auto access and identifying solutions to
address them
• Evaluating ways to enhance the use of accessible taxi service
The Bay Area’s innovative City CarShare is
making up to 300 memberships available to
qualifying CalWORKS participants, thanks to a
grant from MTC.
Passengers on Santa Rosa’s Route 15 bus are
benefiting from a $ 50,000 LIFT grant to extend
service hours.
Leslie Mendez
Reliable transit service can be very important to
older adults who depend on it to access health
services and groceries.
MTC Archives
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 33
Kit Morris
34 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Notes
Section IV
Projects by County
Alameda 36
Contra Costa 38
Marin 40
Napa 42
San Francisco 44
San Mateo 46
Santa Clara 48
Solano 50
Sonoma 52
36 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Alameda County Selected Project Highlights
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
● 1 BART Oakland Airport Connector
STIP Funds: $ 33,000,000
● 2 Interstate 238 – Northbound
Widening Between Interstate 580
and Interstate 880
STIP Funds: $ 29,059,000
● 3 Interstate 680 – Southbound
High- Occupancy- Vehicle Lane
Over Sunol Grade
STIP Funds: $ 29,016,000
● 4 Vasco Road Safety Improvements
STIP Funds: $ 1,400,000
Transportation for Livable
Communities ( TLC Program) —
Funded with Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality
( CMAQ) Funds
● 5 Coliseum Transit Hub Streetscape
Improvements
TLC Grant: $ 1,000,000
● 6 Downtown Berkeley BART Plaza
( planning grant)
TLC Grant: $ 75,000
● 7 Park Street Streetscape and Santa
Clara Avenue Transit Hub
TLC Grant: $ 921,000
● 8 Revive Chinatown, Phase 1
TLC Grant: $ 2,200,000
● 9 Union City Intermodal Station –
Decoto Connections
TLC Grant: $ 1,124,039
● 10 Webster Street
Renaissance Project
TLC Grant: $ 881,219
● 11 West Estudillo Street Streetscape
and BART- Downtown
Connections
TLC Grant: $ 1,000,000
Low- Income Flexible
Transportation ( LIFT) Projects
( funded with CMAQ or
Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds)
● 12 AC Transit – Route 63,
Alameda Point
LIFT Funds: $ 213,333
● 13 LAVTA – Route 14 Extension
LIFT Funds: $ 301,360
● 14 San Leandro Links
LIFT Funds: $ 266,666
Other Significant Federally
Funded Projects:
AC Transit Bus Replacement
FTA Bus: $ 18,440,000
( Not mapped)
AC Transit Welfare- to- Work
Program
JARC Funds: $ 6,937,496
( Not mapped)
● 15 BART Extension to San Jose
New Starts Funds: $ 4,728,375
● 16 Ed Roberts Campus
FTA Bus: $ 481,916
Toll Bridge Project:
● 17 San Francisco- Oakland Bay
Bridge New East Span
Federal, State and Toll Funds:
$ 5,130,000,000
OTHER PROJECTS
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 37
Altamont Commuter Express ( ACE)
Express ( ACE)
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Oakland
International Airport
San Francisco Bay
CONTRA
COSTA
SANTA CLARA
ALAMEDA
SAN JOAQUIN
Salt Marshes
Fremont
Oakland
Hayward
Livermore
Pleasanton
Dublin
Newark
Union
City
San Leandro
Emeryville Corridor
Alameda
SAN MATEO
Berkeley
Albany
Piedmont
BA RT
4
13
24
24
61
61
92
82
238
238
84
84
84
84
82
84
92
80
80
123
262
237
205
280
580
580
580
580
580
580
680
680
680
880
880 980
101
101
238
0 5 10
Miles
10
Kilometers
0 5 Street base map © 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Graphics/ Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
Open space/ park
Regional Airport
International Airport
Ferry Terminal
Ferry
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
BART
STIP project
TLC project
Toll Bridge project
Other FED project
Other STATE project
LIFT project
12
14
13
2
17
11
6
16
1
4
5
7
8
10
9
15
3
38 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Contra Costa County Selected Project Highlights
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
BART Aerial Structure Seismic
Retrofit ( STP Funds) ( not mapped)
STIP Funds: $ 3,026,000
● 1 Interstate 680 – Bollinger Canyon
and Sycamore Valley Road Auxiliary
Lanes
STIP Funds: $ 9,172,000
● 2 Interstate 80 – Westbound High-
Occupancy- Vehicle Lane from
State Route 4 to Carquinez Bridge
STIP Funds: $ 30,689,000
● 3 Martinez Amtrak Station
Improvements
STIP Funds: $ 2,000,000
● 4 Richmond Amtrak/ BART
Intermodal Station
STIP Funds: $ 2,000,000
● 5 State Route 24 Caldecott Tunnel –
Fourth Bore
STIP Funds: $ 12,000,000
● 6 State Route 4 Widening and
Interchange Improvements –
Loveridge to Somersville
STIP Funds: $ 20,035,000
Transportation for Livable
Communities ( TLC Program) —
Funded with Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality
( CMAQ) Funds
● 7 Fairmount Street Pedestrian and
Streetscape Improvements
TLC Grant: $ 500,000
● 8 North Richmond Streetscape
Enhancements, Phase 2
TLC Grant: $ 2,000,000
● 9 Richmond Greenway and Bikeway
TLC Grant: $ 1,900,000
● 10 Richmond Transit Village
Intermodal Station and Pedestrian
Improvements
TLC Grant: $ 2,445,702
Low- Income Flexible
Transportation ( LIFT) Projects
( funded with CMAQ or
Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds)
● 11 WestCat New Fixed Route
Bus Service
LIFT Funds: $ 250,141
Neighborhood House of North
Richmond, Transportation
Coordinator
LIFT Funds: $ 172,900 ( Not mapped)
Toll Bridge Projects:
● 12 Benicia- Martinez Bridge –
New Bridge
RM- 1 and State Funds:
$ 1,057,757,086
● 13 Richmond- San Rafael Bridge
Deck and Trestle Rehabilitation and
Seismic Retrofit
Federal, State and Toll Funds:
$ 1,033,161,784
Other Significant State and
Local Projects:
● 14 Route 4 Widening – Railroad
Avenue to Loveridge Road
State Funds: $ 14,000,000
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS OTHER PROJECTS
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 39
4
4
4
12
160
4
4
13
13
24
24
29
37
61
61
80
80
80
80
80
80
123
185
205
242
280
580
580
580
580
580
580
680
680
780
880
880
980
BART
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Oakland
International
Airport
San Francisco Bay
CONTRA COSTA
ALAMEDA
SOLANO
BART
BART
BART
Amtrak San Joaquins
San Pablo Bay
Antioch
Concord
Richmond
Danville
Orinda
Pittsburg
Oakley
Lafayette
Walnut
Creek
Martinez
Moraga
Brentwood
San Ramon
Pinole
Hercules
Pleasant Hill
Clayton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Street base map 2004 Geographic Technology, GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
© Data Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC Graphics/ Open space/ park
Regional Airport
International Airport
Ferry Terminal
Ferry
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
BART
STIP project
TLC project
Toll Bridge project
Other STATE project
LIFT project
0 5 0 5 Miles
10
Kilometers
10
9
6
14
2
4
5
8
10
7
13
12
11
1
3
40 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Marin County Selected Project Highlights
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
● 1 U. S. Highway 101 High-
Occupancy- Vehicle ( HOV) Lane
Gap Closure ( segments 2,3,4)
STIP Funds: $ 39,053,000
● 2 U. S. Highway 101 Novato Narrows
Widening to Six Lanes
STIP Funds: $ 16,000,000
Transportation for Livable
Communities ( TLC Program) —
Funded with Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality
( CMAQ) Funds
● 3 Cal- Park Tunnel Extension
TLC Grant: $ 1,500,000
● 4 Medway/ Canal Enhancements
TLC Grant: $ 900,000
Low- Income Flexible
Transportation ( LIFT) Projects
( funded with CMAQ or
Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds):
Marin County CalWorks Auto
Program
LIFT Grant: $ 141,226
( Not mapped)
Other Significant Federally
Funded Projects:
● 5 Ferry Channel and Berth
Dredging
FTA Formula Funds: $ 5,948,000
● 6 Golden Gate Seismic Retrofit,
Phases 1- 3 Construction
Federal Discretionary Funds:
$ 100,000,000
● 7 Marin Parklands/ Muir Woods
Visitor Access Improvements
Federal Lands Highway: $ 1,267,776
Toll Bridge Project:
● 8 Richmond- San Rafael Bridge Deck
and Trestle Rehabilitation and
Seismic Retrofit
Federal, State and Toll Funds:
$ 1,033,161,784
Other Significant State and Local
Projects:
● 9 North Coast Railroad Track
Repair and Upgrades
State Funds: $ 42,000,000
● 10 Sonoma- Marin Area Rail Transit
( SMART) – Cloverdale to San
Rafael
State Funds: $ 35,000,000
● 11 U. S. Highway 101 Reversible HOV
Lane in San Rafael
State Funds: $ 14,000,000
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS OTHER PROJECTS
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 41
B
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
CONTRA
COSTA
BART
T
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Drakes Bay
Tomales Bay
San Pablo Bay
San Francisco Bay
Pacific Ocean
NWPRR
NWPRR
Angel
Island
Alcatraz
Island
Treasure
Island
SONOMA
MARIN
Novato
San Rafael
Inverness
Mill Valley
Tiburon
Larkspur
Kentfield
Ross
Fairfax
Santa Venetia
Corte
Madera
Dillon
Beach
Lucas Valley-
Marinwood
San
Anselmo
Sausalito
Point Reyes
Station
Bolinas
Woodacre
Lagunitas-
Forest Knolls
Stinson
Beach
Belvedere
Muir
Beach
Tomales
580
880 980
80
13
13
123
24
80 24
580
101
101
101
131
580
1
1
1
12
37
37 29
80
80
4
80
780
0 5 10
Miles
0 5 10
Kilometers
Street base map © 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Graphics/ Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
Open space/ park
Regional Airport
International Airport
Ferry Terminal
Ferry
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
BART
STIP project
TLC project
Toll Bridge project
Other FED project
Other STATE project
LIFT project
6
1
11
10
9
2
9
4 8
5
7
3
42 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Napa County Selected Project Highlights
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
● 1 Jamieson Canyon Widening
( State Route 12)
STIP Funds: $ 4,000,000
● 2 State Route 12/ 29/ 221 Soscol
Intersection
STIP Funds: $ 4,200,000
● 3 Trancas Interchange Planting
STIP Funds: $ 640,000
Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality Improvement Program
( CMAQ)/ Surface Transportation
Program ( STP)
● 4 American Canyon Road
Rehabilitation
STP Funds: $ 287,000
● 5 Bike Lane on Cuttings Wharf
Road – Segment of the Bay Trail
Network
CMAQ Funds: $ 240,000
● 6 Jefferson Street Rehabilitation
STP Funds: $ 357,000
● 7 Silverado Trail Rehabilitation
STP Funds: $ 424,000
● 8 Third Street Rehabilitation
STP Funds: $ 1,218,000
● 9 Wooden Valley Road
Rehabilitation
STP Funds: $ 760,000
● 10 Yountville Cross Road
Rehabilitation
STP Funds: $ 330,000
Low- Income Flexible
Transportation ( LIFT) Projects
( funded with CMAQ or
Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds)
Napa Flexible Shuttle Service
LIFT Grant: $ 400,000
( Not mapped)
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 43
29
29
12
12
101 116 121
128
128
128
121
12 221
29 12
80
80
680
WPRR
SONOMA
Lake Berryessa
LAKE
YOLO
SOLANO
NAPA
Napa
Angwin
Deer
Park
St. Helena
Calistoga
American
Canyon
Yountville
0 5 10
0 5 10
Kilometers
Street base map © 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Graphics/ Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
Open space/ park
Regional Airport
International Airport
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
STIP project
STP/ CMAQ project
5 2
6
7
9
8
10
4
3
1
44 Metropolitan Transportation Commission City and County of San Francisco
Selected Project Highlights
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
● 1 Caltrain Electrification
STIP Funds: $ 4,300,000
● 2 Golden Gate Ferry Lay Berth and
Terminal Facilities Rehabilitation
STIP Funds: $ 1,000,000
● 3 Muni Third Street Light- Rail
Project ( Maintenance Facility)
STIP Funds: $ 22,570,000
Muni Trolley Bus Procurement
and Rail Replacement
STIP Funds: $ 15,774,000
( not mapped)
Transportation for Livable
Communities ( TLC Program) —
Funded with Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality
( CMAQ) Funds
● 4 Broadway Streetscape
Improvements, Phase II
TLC Grant: $ 2,000,000
● 5 Daly City BART Station,
St. Charles pedestrian and
bicycle access improvement
TLC Grant: $ 500,800
● 6 San Jose/ Guerrero
Neighborhood Plan
TLC Grant: $ 75,000
Low- Income Flexible
Transportation ( LIFT) Projects
( funded with CMAQ or
Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds):
● 7 Treasure Island Bus Service –
Expanded Muni Route 108
LIFT Funds: $ 266,666
Other Significant Federally
Funded Projects:
BART Extension to San Francisco
International Airport and
Millbrae ( Full Funding Grant
Agreement)
Federal New Starts: $ 750,000,000
( mapped in San Mateo County)
● 8 Doyle Drive Replacement Project
Federal Lands Highways: $ 992,000
● 9 Golden Gate Seismic Retrofit,
Phases 1- 3 Construction
Federal Discretionary Funds:
$ 100,000,000
Muni Bus and Facilities Upgrades
FTA Bus: $ 5,000,000
( not mapped)
● 10 Muni Third Street Light Rail
Transit/ Central Subway to
Chinatown
New Starts: $ 20,420,000
● 11 Treasure Island Ferry Docking
Facility
Federal Ferryboat Discretionary:
$ 1,800,000
Toll Bridge Project:
● 12 San Francisco- Oakland Bay
Bridge New East Span
Federal, State and Toll Funds:
$ 5,130,000,000
OTHER PROJECTS
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 45
280
80
35
35
1
1
101
101
101
Alcatraz
Island
Treasure
Island
Yerba Buena
Island
San Francisco Bay
Pacific Ocean
MARIN
SAN FRANCISCO
ALAMEDA BART
BART
Muni Metro
Muni cable car
Caltrain
0 1 2 3
Miles
0 1 2 3
Kilometers
Street base map © 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Graphics/ Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
Open space/ park
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
BART
Light Rail/ Streetcar
Ferry
Ferry Terminal
STIP project
TLC project
Toll Bridge project
Other FED project
LIFT project
9
4
10
11
8
5
7
6
12
3
2
1
7
46 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
● 1 Route 92 Shoulder Widening
and Curve Correction –
Pilarcitos Creek
STIP Funds: $ 2,619,000
● 2 Route 92 Slow- Vehicle Lane
Improvements
STIP Funds: $ 12,540,000
● 3 U. S. Highway 101 Auxiliary
Lanes, Third Avenue to Millbrae
Avenue
STIP Funds: $ 43,963,000
● 4 U. S. Highway 101 Auxiliary Lane
From Santa Clara County Line to
Marsh Road
STIP Funds: $ 9,021,000
● 5 U. S. Highway 101 – Willow Road
Interchange Reconstruction
STIP Funds: $ 20,046,000
Transportation for Livable
Communities ( TLC Program) —
Funded with Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality
( CMAQ) Funds
● 6 BART Linear Park – Huntington
Avenue to Orange Avenue
TLC Grant: $ 1,932,900
● 7 Bay Road Streetscape and Traffic
Calming Improvements
TLC Funds: $ 923,500
● 8 Caltrain Station/ El Camino Real
Improvements ( planning grant)
TLC Grant: $ 63,840
● 9 El Camino Real – Pedestrian
Improvements
TLC Grant: $ 936,500
● 10 Redwood City Transit Station
Precise Plan
TLC Grant: $ 71,760
● 11 Third and Fourth Avenue
Streetscape and Pedestrian
Improvements
TLC Grant: $ 682,500
Low- Income Flexible
Transportation ( LIFT) Projects
( funded with CMAQ or
Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds):
East Palo Alto Caltrain Shuttle
LIFT Grant: $ 258,500
( Not mapped)
East Palo Alto Youth Shuttle
LIFT Funds: $ 216,220
( Not mapped)
Other Significant Federally
Funded Projects:
● 12 BART Extension to San Francisco
International Airport and
Millbrae ( Full Funding Grant
Agreement)
Federal New Starts: $ 750,000,000
SamTrans Zero- Emission Fuel
Cell Bus Acquisition
FTA Bus: $ 722,874
( not mapped)
Other Significant State- Only
Funded Project:
● 13 Caltrain Peninsula Grade
Separations at Linden, Poplar
and 25th Avenues
State Funds: $ 15,000,000
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS OTHER PROJECTS
San Mateo County Selected Project Highlights
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 47
Oakland
International
Airport
San Francisco
International Airport
SANTA
CLARA
SAN
MATEO
Pacific
Ocean
SANTA CRUZ
Tunitas
San Gregorio
Pescadero
La Honda
Caltrain
BART
Salt Marshes
Pacifica
Redwood City
San
Mateo
Woodside
Daly City
Menlo
Park
Portola
Valley
Atherton
San Carlos
Belmont
San Bruno
El Granada
Montara
Hillsborough
South San Francisco
Half Moon Bay
Millbrae
Foster City
Brisbane
Burlingame
Colma
East
Palo
Alto
Moss Beach
Broadmoor
San Francisco Bay
280
280
280
84
84
8
82
82
92
92
880 580
92
35
35
35
9
280
82
84
35 380
35
1
1
1
1
101
101
101
0 5 10
Miles
0 5 10
Kilometers Street base map © 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Graphics/ Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
Open space/ park
Regional Airport
International Airport
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
BART
STIP project
TLC project
Other FED project
Other STATE project
12
12
6
3
13
13
13
4
4
1 2 5
7
8
11
8
10
9
48 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Santa Clara County Selected Project Highlights
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
● 1 Caltrain San Jose to Santa Clara
Fourth Main Track
STIP Funds: $ 17,900,000
● 2 Interstate 680 – Northbound
High- Occupancy- Vehicle Lane
Over Sunol Grade
STIP Funds: $ 25,080,000
● 3 Interstate 680 – Southbound
High- Occupancy- Vehicle Lane
Over Sunol Grade
STIP Funds: $ 8,308,000
● 4 Interstate 880 Soundwalls from
Stevens Creek Boulevard to
Interstate 280
STIP Funds: $ 2,377,000
● 5 State Route 152 Passing Lanes
STIP Funds: $ 8,246,000
● 6 State Route 152/ 156 Interchange
STIP Funds: $ 7,850,000
Transportation for Livable
Communities ( TLC Program) —
Funded with Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality
( CMAQ) Funds
● 7 Monterey Streetscape
Improvements – Fourth Street to
Sixth Street, City of Gilroy
TLC Grant: $ 2,500,000
● 8 Morgan Hill – Depot Street
Capital Improvements
TLC Grant: $ 2,626,638
● 9 Murphy Avenue Streetscape
Revitalization, City of Sunnyvale
TLC Grant: $ 75,000
Low- Income Flexible Transporta-tion
( LIFT) Project ( funded with
CMAQ or Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds):
Countywide Children’s Shuttle
Service to Schools – not mapped
LIFT Funds: $ 266,666
( not mapped)
Other Significant Federally
Funded Projects:
Bus Expansion for Santa Clara
Valley Transportation Authority
FTA Funds: $ 4,600,000
( not mapped)
Guaranteed Ride Home Program
JARC Funds: $ 594,709
( not mapped)
● 10 Silicon Valley Rapid Transit
Corridor – BART Extension
to San Jose
New Starts Funds: $ 4,728,375
Santa Clara Valley
Transportation Authority
Bus Signal Prioritization
FTA Bus: $ 722,874
( not mapped)
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 49
VTA Light Rail
Jose
International
Airport
San SANTA CRUZ
SANTA CLARA
SAN
MATEO
ALAMEDA
SAN BENITO
STANISLAUS
Salt Marshes
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Caltrain
San Francisco Bay
Pacific Ocean
Commuter Express ( ACE)
UPRR
San Jose
Gilroy
Palo Alto
Sunnyvale
Milpitas
Santa Clara
Saratoga
Los Gatos
Cupertino
Morgan Hill
Mountain
View
Los Altos
Campbell
Los Altos Hills
Monte Sereno
VTA Light Rail
Altamont
Caltrain 680
680
130
880
280
280
237
262
82
82
84
84
5
35
9
17
85
85
152 152
152
25 156
87
Street base map © 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Graphics/ Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
Open space/ park
Regional Airport
International Airport
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
Light Rail
STIP project
STP/ CMAQ project
TLC project
Other FED project
Other STATE project
0 5 10
Miles
0 5 10
Kilometers
9
8
7
4
10
3
2
6
5
1
50 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Solano County Selected Project Highlights
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
● 1 Benicia Intermodal
Transportation Station
STIP Funds: $ 1,325,000
● 2 Capitol Corridor Bahia Viaduct
Track Upgrade
STIP Funds: $ 2,250,000
● 3 Interstate 80 Reliever
Route/ Jepson Parkway – Between
State Route 12 and Interstate 80
on Walters, Vanden and Leisure
Town Roads
STIP Funds: $ 21,960,000
● 4 Local Road Improvements
North of Interstate 80/ 680/ 12
Interchange
STIP Funds: $ 11,412,000
● 5 Vallejo Ferry Intermodal Facility
– Parking Structure
STIP Funds: $ 7,300,000
Transportation for Livable
Communities ( TLC Program) —
Funded with Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality
( CMAQ) Funds
● 6 Sereno Bus Transfer Facility
TLC Grant: $ 382,500
● 7 Vallejo Station Pedestrian Links
TLC Grant: $ 2,070,921
Low- Income Flexible
Transportation ( LIFT) Project
( funded with CMAQ or
Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds):
City of Dixon, Taxi Voucher
Program
LIFT Grant: $ 37,440
( Not mapped)
Other Significant Federally
Funded Projects:
● 8 Fairfield Capitol Corridor
Intercity Rail Station
CMAQ & FTA Bus Funds:
$ 1,894,906
Toll Bridge Project:
● 9 Benicia- Martinez Bridge –
New Bridge
RM- 1 and State Funds:
$ 1,057,757,086
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS OTHER PROJECT
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 51
128
505
80
80
12
680
680
80 780
80
29
29
12
12
37
221
121
12
84
220
113
SOLANO
San Pablo Bay
Grizzly Bay
Suisun Bay
Honker Bay
NAPA
YOLO
SACRAMENTO
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
Fairfield
Vallejo
Vacaville
Benicia
Dixon
Rio Vista
Green
Valley
Suisun City
Elmira
Amtrak Capitol Corridor
0 5 10
Miles
0 5 10
Kilometers
Street base map © 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Graphics/ Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
Open space/ park
Regional Airport
International Airport
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
Ferry Terminal
Ferry
STIP project
TLC project
Toll Bridge project
Other FED project
5 1
3
7
6
9
2
8
4
State Transportation
Improvement Program
( STIP) Funding:
● 1 U. S. Highway 101 High-
Occupancy- Vehicle ( HOV) Lane –
Petaluma to Rohnert Park
STIP Funds: $ 6,000,000
● 2 U. S. Highway 101 HOV Lane –
Rohnert Park to Santa Rosa
Avenue
STIP Funds: $ 39,400,000
● 3 U. S. Highway 101 HOV Lane –
Steele Lane to Windsor
STIP Funds: $ 6,000,000
● 4 U. S. Highway 101 HOV – Steele
Lane to State Route 12
STIP Funds: $ 48,753,000
Transportation for Livable
Communities ( TLC Program) —
Funded with Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality
( CMAQ) Funds
● 5 Downtown Pedestrian
Linkages Study
TLC Grant: $ 44,400
● 6 Petaluma Riverwalk
TLC Funds: $ 358,000
Low- Income Flexible
Transportation ( LIFT) Project
( funded with CMAQ or
Job Access and Reverse
Commute Funds):
CalWorks Transportation
Workshops
LIFT grant: $ 266,666
( Not mapped)
Other Significant Federally
Funded Project:
Compressed Natural Gas Bus
Facilities Upgrade for Sonoma
County Transit
FTA Bus: $ 289,149
( Not mapped)
Other Significant State- Only
Funded Projects:
● 7 North Coast Railroad Track
Repair and Upgrades
State Funds: $ 42,000,000
● 8 Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit
( SMART) – Cloverdale to
San Rafael
State Funds: $ 35,000,000
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS OTHER PROJECTS
52 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Sonoma County Selected Project Highlights
Key Map
NOTE: Project amounts reflect currently programmed amount for fund source shown, not total project costs.
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 53
128
128
128
128
29
116
12
1
1
1
1
12
12
12
29
29
221
37 29
37
121
116
101
101
101
SONOMA NAPA
LAKE
MENDOCINO
MARIN
Bay
San Pablo Bay
Pacific Ocean
Stewarts
Point
Sea Ranch
Jenner
Duncans
Mills
Mirabel
Park
Schellville
Kenwood
Oakmont
Geyserville
NWPRR
Bodega
Santa
Rosa
Petaluma
Windsor
Bodega
Bay
Rohnert Park
Occidental
Forestville
Sonoma
Healdsburg
Cotati
Guerneville
Graton
Cloverdale
Glen Ellen
Temelec
Sebastopol
Monte Rio
El Verano
Eldridge
Boyes Hot Springs
0 5 10 15
Miles
0 5 10 15
Kilometers
Street base map © 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
MTC GIS/ Garlynn Woodsong – MTC Graphics/ Peter Beeler 2/ 2005
Open space/ park
Regional Airport
International Airport
Freeway
Highway
Primary Road
Local Road
Railroad
STIP project
TLC project
Other STATE project
7
7
7
8
7
8
8
7
6
3
4
5
1
2
54 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Notes
Twenty- Sixth Annual Report to Congress 55
Bay Area Partnership Board and
MTC Advisory Committees
Transit Operators
Alameda- Contra Costa Transit District
( AC Transit)
RICK FERNANDEZ 510.891.4753
Bay Area Rapid Transit District ( BART)
TOM MARGRO 510.464.6065
Central Contra Costa Transit Authority
( County Connection)
RICK RAMACIER 925.676.1976
Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority
( Tri Delta)
JEANNE KRIEG 925.754.6622
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway &
Transportation District
CELIA KUPERSMITH 415.923.2203
Livermore Amador Valley Transit Author-ity
( WHEELS)
BARBARA DUFFY 925.455.7555
San Francisco Municipal
Railway ( Muni)
MICHAEL BURNS 415.554.4129
San Mateo County Transit District
( SamTrans)/ Peninsula Corridor
Joint Powers Board ( Caltrain)
MIKE SCANLON 650.508.6221
Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority ( VTA)
PETE CIPOLLA 408.321.5559
Santa Rosa Department of
Transit & Parking
ROBERT DUNLAVEY 707.543.3325
Vallejo Transit
JOHN HARRIS 707.648.5241
Regional Agencies
Association of Bay Area Governments
HENRY GARDNER 510.464.7910
Bay Area Air Quality
Management District
JACK BROADBENT 415.749.5052
Bay Conservation & Development
Commission
WILL TRAVIS 415.352.3600
Metropolitan Transportation
Commission
STEVE HEMINGER 510.464.7810
RIDES for Bay Area Commuters
DAVID FASTENAU 510.893.7665
Airports and Seaports
Port of Oakland
JERRY A. BRIDGES 510.627.1339
Livermore Municipal Airport
LEANDER HAURI 925.373.5280
Congestion Management
Agencies
Alameda County Congestion
Management Agency
DENNIS FAY 510.836.2560
City/ County Association of
Governments of San Mateo County
RICHARD NAPIER 650.599.1420
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
ROBERT MCCLEARY 925.256.4724
Transportation Authority of Marin
CRAIG TACKABERY 415.499.6582
Napa County Transportation
Planning Agency
MICHAEL ZDON 707.259.8634
San Francisco County
Transportation Authority
JOSÉ LUIS MOSCOVICH 415.522.4803
Santa Clara Valley
Transportation Authority
CAROLYN GONOT 408.321.5623
Solano Transportation Authority
DARYL HALLS 707.424.6007
Sonoma County
Transportation Authority
SUZANNE WILFORD 707.565.5373
Public Works Directors
City of San Jose
JIM HELMER 408.277.5746
County of Sonoma
DAVID KNIGHT 707.565.2231
County of Alameda
DONALD LA BELLE 510.670.5455
City of San Mateo
LARRY PATTERSON 650.522.7303
State
California Air Resources Board
CATHERINE WITHERSPOON 916.445.4383
California Highway Patrol,
Golden Gate Division
CATHY SULINSKI 707.648.4180
California Transportation Commission
DIANE EIDAM 916.654.4245
Caltrans Headquarters
WILL KEMPTON 916.654.5267
Caltrans District 4
BIJAN SARTIPI 510.286.5900
Federal
Federal Highway Administration,
California Division
GENE K. FONG 916.498.5014
Federal Transit Administration, Region 9
LESLIE ROGERS 415.744.3133
MTC Advisory
Committees
MTC Advisory Council
DOUG SHOEMAKER, CHAIR, 415.989.8160
MTC Elderly and Disabled
Advisory Committee
BRUCE OKA, CHAIR, 415.386.5549
MTC Minority Citizens
Advisory Committee
FRANK GALLO, CHAIR, 510.924.9930
56 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Notes
Graphic design: Peter Beeler and Michele Stone
Cover design: Peter Beeler and Michele Stone ( topographic relief map of California by Garlynn Woodsong)
Front cover photographs ( clockwise from upper left): Muni trolley – Peter Beeler; BART train and passengers at SFO – John A. Benson; AC Transit Rapid Bus – AC Transit;
Participants at Eastmont Mall Transportation 2030 Plan outreach meeting – Peter Beeler; Bike- to- Work Day participants – Kit Morris; Carquinez Bridge opening day – Bill Hall;
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority ( VTA) light- rail vehicle – VTA; Golden Gate Ferry – GGBH& TD; Fruitvale Transit Village – Evelyn Johnson; Highway 24 traffic – Caltrans.
Maps: Peter Beeler, David Cooper and Garlynn Woodsong
METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607- 4700
TEL 510.464.7700
FAX 510.464.7848
TTY/ TDD 510.464.7769
E- MAIL info@ mtc. ca. gov
WEB www. mtc. ca. gov