InvestmentAnalysis ALC RM AR edits 2019 TIP Investment Analysis Page 1 June 18, 2018 INTRODUCTION...

Draft 2019 TIP June 18, 2018

APPENDIX A 3

2 0 1 9 T I P I n v e s t m e n t A n a l y s i s

2019 TIP Investment Analysis

AFOCUSONLOWINCOMEANDMINORITYPOPULATIONS,SENIORS,ANDPERSONSWITHDISABILITIES

Draft 2019 TIP Investment Analysis Page 1 June 18, 2018

INTRODUCTION The2019TIPInvestmentAnalysisisanassessmentofTIPinvestmentsthroughanequitylens,specificallyfocusedontheBayAreasdisadvantagedpopulations.Thepurposeoftheanalysisistounderstandiflowincomeandminoritypopulations,seniors,andpersonswithdisabilitiesaresharingequitablyintheregionsneartermtransportationinvestments.2019TIPTheBayAreas2019TIPcoversthefouryearperiodofFY201819throughFY202122andincludesmorethan500transportationprojectswith$13billionincommittedfundingduringthefouryearperiod.ProjectsintheTIPTheTIPincludesalltransportationprojectsthatarefederallyfunded,requireafederalaction,orareconsideredregionallysignificantforairqualityconformitypurposes.ThemajorityofprojectsintheTIParefederallyfunded,althoughsomelocalorstatefundedprojectsarealsoincluded,particularlythosethatarelargeinscaleorimpacttravelpatternsoverarelativelylargegeographicarea,suchasanewlaneonastatehighway.InreviewingTIPinvestmentsasawhole,itisimportanttokeepinmindthatmosttransportationprojectsarelocal,inbothscaleandfunding,andtheseprojectsaretypicallynotreflectedintheTIP.Theseprojectsincludepavementpreservation,transitoperationsandmaintenance,planningefforts,bicycle/pedestrianimprovements,andminorintersectionimprovements.AllprojectsincludedintheTIPmustbeconsistentwiththeregionslongrangeplan,PlanBayArea2040(thePlan).Assuch,theTIPrepresentsafouryearsnapshotthatisasmallpartofthe24yearsofthePlan.InadditiontothetotalinvestmentscapturedintheTIPversusthePlan,thereisanimportantdifferencebetweenthesetwodocumentsthatcomplicatesanysidebysidecomparison.WhilethePlanincludestheuniverseofrevenuesreasonablyexpectedtobeavailable(federal,state,local,andprivatefunds)toimplementplannedtransportationprojects,program,andstrategies,theTIPismuchmorefocusedonprojectswithfederalfundingorthataffectairqualityconformity.ThismeansthattheTIPismoreheavilyweightedtowardlargecapitalprojects,suchastransitandhighwayexpansions,thataremorelikelytorequirefederalfundsoraction.Thevastmajorityoffundsthatgotooperate,maintain,andmanagetheregionsexistingtransportationsystem,atoppriorityofthelongrangeplan,arenottypicallycapturedinaTIPastheytendtobelocallyfunded.SeeFigure1,onthefollowingpage,foranillustrationofthisdistinction.


Figure1.TIPandPlanInvestmentsbyMode/Type

$303billion

24years$13.2billion

4yearsThenarrowerfocusoftheTIPalsomeansonlyafractionoftotalregionaltransportationexpendituresarecapturedinanygivenyear.Onaverage,oneyearofinvestmentsinthe2019TIPaccountsforonlyaquarterofannualexpendituresintheregionallongrangeplan.AnotherfeatureoftheTIPthatdistinguishesitfromtheregionallongrangeplanisthatittendstobeamoredynamicdocumentmeaningthatitisrevisedfrequentlytoreflectchangingfundingandprojectchanges,andongoingfundingefforts.Forcontext,the2017TIPwasamendedormodifiedmorethan30timesinthetwoyearsfollowingitsfederalapproval.EquityandEnvironmentalJusticeConsiderationsAsthefederallydesignatedMetropolitanPlanningOrganization(MPO)fortheBayArea,MTCisrequiredtoensurethattheregionstransportationplanningprocessescomplywithapplicableequityandenvironmentaljusticerequirements.Thelegal,regulatory,andpolicyframeworkforaddressingthoseissuesisdescribedinAppendixAandincludes: TitleVIoftheCivilRightsAct:statesthatnopersonshallbesubjectto

discriminationbasedonhisorherrace,colorornationaloriginunderanyfederallyfundedprogram.

FederalGuidanceonEnvironmentalJustice:requirementthatfederalprogramsandfundsdonotresultindisproportionatelyhighandadverseimpactsonminorityandlowincomepopulations.

MTCsEnvironmentalJusticePrinciples:adoptedprinciplesthataffirmMTCsongoingcommitmentsto:

Operate+Maintain72%

Modernize16%

Expand10%

DebtService+CostContingency

2%

PlanBayArea2040InvestmentsExpendituresbyInvestmentStrategy

Operate+Maintain34%

Modernize19%

Expand47%

DebtService+CostContingency


Createanopenandtransparentpublicparticipationprocessthatempowersdisadvantagedcommunitiestoparticipateindecisionmakingthataffectsthem,and

Collectaccurateandcurrentdataessentialtodefiningandunderstandingthepresenceandextentofinequities,ifany,intransportationfundingbasedonraceandincome.

MTCsatisfiesitsrequirementsforequityandenvironmentaljusticeprimarilythroughPlanBayAreasEquityAnalysis,MTCsPublicParticipationPlan,andMTCsbroaderTitleVIprogram.TofurtherbuilduponMTCscommitmenttoaddressequityconcerns,theTIPInvestmentAnalysisprovidesthepublicwithanadditionalopportunitytoassesstheregionstransportationinvestments.


BAY AREA COMMUNITY CONTEXT DemographicProfileAnimportantfirststepoftheinvestmentanalysisistounderstandthedemographiccontextandtravelpatternsfortheBayArea.Race/EthnicityTheBayAreaisoneofthemostdiverseregionsinthecountry,with60percentofthepopulationselfidentifyingasmembersofaracialand/orethnicminority.Inthismajorityminorityregion,aquarterofthepopulationidentifiesasAsian(25%),followedcloselybyHispanicorLatino(24%),andthenBlackorAfricanAmerican(6%).Otherracialminorities,includingthoseidentifyingastwoormoreraces,accountfortheremaining5%ofthepopulation.

TABLE1.PopulationDistributionbyRace/Ethnicity Population

(inmillions) %Minority 4.6 60%Asian 2.0 25%HispanicorLatino 1.8 24%BlackorAfricanAmerican 0.4 6%Otherminority 0.4 5%

NonMinority 3.0 40%Total 7.6 100%

Notes:TabulationpreparedbyMTCbasedondatafrom2016AmericanCommunitySurvey,TableC03002.IncomeAlthoughtheBayAreaseconomyhasshownstronggrowthoverthepastfewdecades,regionallevelsofpovertypersist.Nearlyninepercentofthepopulationlivesbelowthefederalpovertylevel($24,300ayearforafamilyoffour).Another12percentoftheregionshouseholdsaretechnicallyabovethefederalpovertylinebutstillqualifyaslowincomeforthepurposesofthisanalysis,definedashouseholdswithincomesthatfallbelow$50,000(approximately200percentofthefederalpovertylineforafamilyoffour).Forreference,the2016medianincomeforafamilyoffourrangesfromjustover$69,000inSolanoCountytomorethan$101,000inSantaClaraCounty.

TABLE2.PopulationDistributionbyHouseholdIncome Population

(inmillions) %LowIncome 1.6 21%$150,000 2.7 36%

Total 7.5 100%

Notes:TabulationpreparedbyMTCbasedondatafrom2016AmericanCommunitySurveyPublicUseMicrodataSamples.Incomeiscalculatedin2016denominateddollars.Notethattheuniverseispersonsinhouseholdsandexcludespersonslivingingroupquarters.


SeniorsandPersonswithDisabilitiesMorethan14%oftheBayAreaspopulationisaged65orolder.PersonsreportingdisabilitiesacrosssixcategoriesdefinedbytheCensusBureautotalnearly10%oftheregionspopulation.

TABLE3.SeniorsandPersonswithDisabilities

Population(inmillions) %

Seniors 1.1 14%PersonswithDisabilities 0.8 10%

Notes:TabulationpreparedbyMTCbasedondatafrom2016AmericanCommunitySurveyTablesC18101andB01001.Notethattheuniverseisciviliannoninstitutionalizedpopulationcountedindisability.

TravelPatternsCommutetripsbyBayArearesidentsareoverwhelminglymadebymotorvehicle(76%)followedbytransit(12%),nonmotorizedtrips(5%),telecommute(6%),andothermodes(1%).

TABLE4.ShareofCommuteTripsbyModebyPopulation Low

Income Minority SeniorsTotal

PopulationRoadway(Motorized) 73% 78% 73% 76%Roadway(Nonmotorized) 8% 4% 4% 5%Transit 11% 12% 8% 12%Telecommute 6% 4% 14% 6%Other 2% 1% 1% 1%Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Notes:TabulationpreparedbyMTCbasedondatafrom2016AmericanCommunitySurveyPublicUseMicrodataSamples.Incomeiscalculatedin2016denominateddollars.Notethattheuniverseispersonsinhouseholdsandexcludespersonslivingingroupquarters.Theshareofalltrips(includingbothcommuteandnoncommutetrips)madebytargetpopulationgroupsisprovidedinTable4below.Whiletherearedifferencesinthetravelpatternsoflowincome,minorityandseniorpopulations,thevastmajorityofalltripsarecategorizedasroadwaytrips,whichincludeshighwayandroadwaytravelaswellastripsmadebywalkingorbiking.

TABLE5.ShareofCommuteandNonCommuteTripsbyModebyPopulation Low

Income Minority SeniorsTotal

PopulationRoadway(Motorized) 74% 80% 82% 80%Roadway(Nonmotorized) 18% 14% 14% 15%Transit 7% 6% 4% 5%Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Notes:Tabulationbasedon2012CaliforniaHouseholdTravelSurvey.Tabulationdoesnotincludeshareoftripsmadebypersonswithdisabilitiesduetosamplesizelimitations.


METHODOLOGY The2019TIPinvestmentanalysisisbuiltonthreecomponentsthatworktogethertoinformhowlowincomeandminoritycommunities,seniors,andpersonswithdisabilitiesmaybeaffectedbytheproposedinvestmentsinthe2019TIP.

Themethodologiesusedineachanalysisaredescribedinmoredetailbelow.AppendixBincludesdefinitionsanddatasourcesusedinthisanalysis.PopulationUseBasedAnalysisThisportionoftheanalysiscomparestheestimatedpercentofinvestmentsincludedintheTIPthatbenefitlowincomeandminoritypopulations,aswellasseniors,tothepercentofthesepopulationsrelativeusageofthetransportationsystem,forbothroadwaysandtransit.Theanalysismeasurestransitandmotorvehicletripsusingthe20122013CaliforniaHouseholdTravelSurvey.

1. Forthisanalysis,investmentsintheTIPareseparatedintotwomodes:transitandlocalstreetsandroads/highway(referredtoasroadway).Forsimplicity,pedestrianandbicycleprojectsareassignedtolocalstreetsandroadsandnotevaluatedasaseparatemodeoftravelorinvestmenttype.Forreference,AppendixCincludesmapsforeachcountywithprojectsshownwiththeirroadwayortransitcategorization.

2. Toanalyzewhatshareofeachmode(transitandroadway)lowincome,minority,andseniorpopulationsutilize,thefollowingdefinitionsareusedtoidentifydisadvantagedpopulations: LowIncomeHouseholds:Lowincomehouseholdsweredefinedashouseholds

earning$50,000orless.Thisisroughlyequivalentto200percentofthefederalpovertylevelforafamilyoffour.

MinorityHouseholds:Forthisanalysis,minorityhouseholdsweredefinedusingU.S.CensusBureaudefinitions.RacialandethnicminoritiesexaminedinthisanalysisareHispanic,blackorAfricanAmerican,Asian,andotherortwoormoreraces.

Seniors:Seniorsaredefinedaspersonsaged65andover.

PopulationUseBasedAnalysisPercentofinvestmentsthatwouldlikelybeusedbylowincomeandminoritypopulations,andseniors

DisparateImpactAnalysisPercapitaandperridertransitinvestmentslikelybenefitingracialorethnicminorities

TransportationEquityMeasuresAnalysisMapsandsummarydataonprojectsthatsupportPlanBayArea2040stransportationfocusedequitymeasures


3. Theassignmentofinvestmentsbyusageisthenperformedbymultiplyingthepercentofuseofthemodebytheinvestmentinthatparticularmode.Thisanalysisisconductedatthecountylevelforhighwaysandroadwaysandatthetransitoperatorlevelfortransit.Forthemultimodal,aggregateanalysis,tripdatafromthehouseholdtravelsurveyisused.Asanillustrativeexample,lowincomepopulationsmake32%ofAlamedaCountyroadwaytrips.Fora$50millionstatehighwayprojectinthatcounty,32%or$16million,wouldbeassignedasafinancialbenefittolowincomepopulationsandtheremaining68%,or$34million,totheremainingpopulation.Asimilarapproachisfollowedfortransitinvestmentsbyoperator.Asimilaranalysisisconductedusingroadwayvehiclemilestraveled(VMT)andtransitorigindestinationdistance.Fortheindepthanalysis,transitusagedataisderivedfromthemostrecenttransitsurveydataavailableforeachoperatorthroughMTCsongoingTransitPassengerDemographicSurvey.Forindepthroadwayusage,VMTdataisusedfromthehouseholdtravelsurvey.

4. Theinvestmentsbymode(fromcountyortransitoperatordata)aresummedforlowincome,minority,andseniorpopulationsbasedoneachgroupsusageshareofeachmode.Thepercentofusageofthesystembythetargetandotherpopulationsisthencomparedtothepercentofinvestmentfortripssupportingthatpopulation.

DisparateImpactAnalysisThisportionoftheanalysiscompares2019TIPinvestmentspercapitaforracialorethnicminoritypopulationstopercapitainvestmentsidentifiedfornonminoritypopulations,toinvestigatewhetherdisadvantagedpersonsintheregionarereceivinganequitableshareofthebenefitsfromTIPinvestments.DuetothesimilaritiesintheanalysisrequiredbytheFederalTransitAdministration(FTA)forthelongrangetransportationplan,thisportionoftheanalysisisalsoreferredtoastheTitleVIanalysis.ThedisparateimpactanalysisisnotarequiredcomponentoftheTIP,andisprovidedforinformationalpurposesonly.Thisportionoftheanalysisfocusesonfederalandstatefundedprojectsonly.SomeoftheStateandFederalfundsourcesincludedareFTA5307,FTA5309,FTA5311,FTA5337funds,STP/CMAQ,Proposition1B,andSenateBill1(SB1)funds.Inaddition,allracialorethnicminoritygroups(Asian,BlackorAfricanAmerican,HispanicorLatinoandotherminorities)areevaluatedcollectivelyincomparisontotheinvestmentspercapitafornonminoritypopulations.Thedisparateimpactanalysisincorporatesthequantitativeresultsproducedbythepopulation/usebasedanalysisforstateandfederallyfundedprojects.Investmentsarefirstexpressedintermsofinvestmentspercapitaforbothminorityandnonminoritytransitriders(ortotalpopulation)intheregionasfollows:


Minoritybenefitpercapita= Totaltransitinvestmentsallocatedtominorityriders Totalregionalminoritytransitridership(orpopulation) Nonminoritybenefitpercapita=Totaltransitinvestmentsallocatedtononminorityriders Totalregionalnonminoritytransitridership(orpopulation)Next,theminorityandnonminoritypercapitabenefitresultsarecompared,expressingtheminoritybenefitpercapitaasapercentageofthenonminoritybenefitpercapita:Result(%)=Minoritybenefitpercapita Nonminoritybenefitpercapita

AlthoughFTAdoesnotprovidespecificguidanceorstandardbenchmarksforMPOstouseinthemetropolitanplanningprocesstodeterminewhetheranygivenresultforalongrangeplanrepresentsadisparateimpact,ageneralpracticeistousethepercentageresulttodeterminewhetheranydifferencesbetweenbenefitsforminorityornonminoritypopulationsmaybeconsideredstatisticallysignificant.Ifadisparateimpactinthelongrangeplanisfoundtobestatisticallysignificant,considerationmustthenbegiventowhetherthereisasubstantiallegitimatejustificationforthepolicythatresultedinthedisparateimpacts,andiftherearealternativesthatcouldbeemployedthatwouldhavealessdiscriminatoryimpact.1Asstatedearlier,thedisparateimpactanalysisisnotafederalrequirementfortheTIP,andisincludedinthe2019TIPInvestmentAnalysisforinformationalpurposes.TransportationEquityMeasuresAnalysisThethirdcomponentoftheanalysishighlightsprojectsandinvestmentsthatarelikelytosupportourregionalperformancetargetsinfivetransportationrelatedequitymeasuresfromPlanBayArea2040.PlanBayArea2040GoalArea Goal# PerformanceTargetHealthyandSafeCommunities

3 Reducedadversehealthimpactsassociatedwithairquality,roadsafety,andphysicalinactivityby10%

EconomicVitality 8 Increaseby20%theshareofjobsaccessiblewithin30minutesbyautoorwithin45minutesbytransitincongestedconditions

TransportationSystemEffectiveness

12 Reducevehicleoperatingandmaintenancecostsduetopavementconditionsby100%

13 Reduceperridertransitdelayduetoagedinfrastructureby100%EquitableAccess 5 Decreasetheshareoflowerincomeresidentshouseholdincome

consumedbytransportationandhousingby10%HealthyandSafeCommunitiesProjectsthatareexpectedtocontributetowardsreachingourregionalgoalsforhealthyandsafecommunitiesincludeprojectsthatimproveroadsafety,projectsthatincreasephysicalactivity,andprojectsthatimproveairquality.Theseprojectsareidentifiedby: 1 FTA Circular 4702.1B, page VI-2.


Safety:Projectsidentifiedbytheprojectsponsorsashavingaprimarypurpose

ofaddressingsafety,orasanticipatedtohaveasignificantimpactonreducingfatalitiesandseriousinjuriesforallusers.

PhysicalActivity:Projectsidentifiedbyprojectsponsorsasbeingfocusedprimarilyonbicycleorpedestrians(greaterthan50%oftheprojectsinvestmentsupportsbicyclistsand/orpedestrians),andthetotalinvestmentsincludedintheTIPthatsupportbicycleorpedestrianmoderegardlessoftheprojectsprimarypurpose.

AirQuality:ProjectsfundedwithfederalCongestionMitigationAirQuality

ImprovementProgram(CMAQ),stateCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard(CARB),regionalTransportationforCleanAir(TFCA)grants,orinMTCsClimateInitiativesProgram.

Thenumberandinvestmentleveloftheprojectssupportingthehealthyandsafecommunitiesgoalareaaresummarizedattheregionalandcountylevel.Safetyandactivetransportationprojectsthathavephysicallocations(ex.:acompletestreetsproject,oraninterchangeimprovement)arealsomappedovertheregionsCommunitiesofConcern(COCs).EconomicVitalityTransportationprojectsthatcanbeexpectedtoincreaseaccessibilitytotheshareofjobsbycarandtransitareprojectsthatreducetrafficcongestionorimprovethereliabilityoftheexistingtransportationsystem.Theseprojectsareidentifiedby:

RoadCongestion/Reliability:Roadprojectsidentifiedbytheprojectsponsorsashavingaprimarypurposeofaddressingcongestionorsystemreliability,orprojectsanticipatedashavingasignificantimpactoncongestionreductionorimprovedsystemreliability.

TransitService/Capacity:Transitprojectsidentifiedbytheprojectsponsorsashavingaprimarypurposeofaddressingcongestionorsystemreliability,orprojectsanticipatedashavingasignificantimpactoncongestionreductionorimprovedsystemreliability.

Thenumberandinvestmentlevelofprojectssupportingtheeconomicvitalitygoalareaaresummarizedattheregionalandcountylevel.Additionally,projectsidentifiedasimprovingcongestionorsystemreliabilitythathavephysicallocations(ex.:anewbusrapidtransitproject,oranewHOVorexpresslane)arealsomappedovertheregionsCommunitiesofConcern(COCs).


TransportationSystemEffectivenessThetransportationsystemeffectivenessgoalareaencompassestwoperformancemeasures:pavementconditionandtransitstateofgoodrepair.Theseprojectsareidentifiedby:

PavementCondition:Projectsthatincludeapavementrehabilitationorpreservationcomponent.

TransitStateofGoodRepair:Projectsthatrehabilitateorreplaceexistingtransitassets.

Thenumberandinvestmentlevelofprojectssupportingimprovedpavementconditionsaresummarizedattheregionallevelandcountylevel.Additionally,pavementprojectsarealsomappedovertheregionsCommunitiesofConcern(COCs).Transitstateofgoodrepairinvestmentsaresummarizedattheregionalandtransitoperatorlevel.Astransitassetprojectstendtobesystemwide,ratherthantiedtoastaticlocation,theyarenotincludedintheTransportationSystemEffectivenessmaps.Transitprojectsassociatedwithneworexpandedserviceinspecificlocations,suchasanewlightrailline,arerepresentedintheEconomicVitalitymaps.EquitableAccessTheEquitableAccesscomponentiscalculatedattheprogramlevelforthe2019TIP.ReplicatingPlanBayArea2040smethodology,dataisprovidedfromtheregionaltransportationmodeltoreportthetransportationcostsforlowincomehouseholdsin2022(endofthe2019TIPperiod)ascomparedtothetransportationcostsforthegeneralpopulation.Inthetravelmodel,andthusforpurposesofthiscalculation,lowincomehouseholdsaredefinedasthoseearninglessthan$60,000peryearinyear2000dollars,roughlyreflectingthelowertwoquartilesoftheincomespectrum.GiventhefocusoftheTIPontransportationinvestments,thehousingcostsportionoftheEquitableAccessmeasureisexcludedfromthisanalysis.LimitationsAsaregionalanalysis,themethodsusedintheTIPinvestmentanalysishaveseverallimitations.Themostsignificantlimitationisthattheanalysisdoesnotdirectlyassesstheresultingbenefitandburdenofspecificprojectsorprograms,suchastraveltimesavingsorimprovedaccessibilitytojobsorotherdestinations.Otherlimitationsare:

TIPisasnapshotintime:ItisalsoimportanttoreemphasizethattheTIPdoesnotreflectthefullpictureoftransportationinvestmentsintheBayAreaoverthelongterm.Asdiscussedintheintroduction,theTIPonlyincludesfouryearsofneartermfundprogramming,comparedtothe20+yearsforecastinPlanBayArea2040.Also,fundingshownintheTIPisincludedintheyearthatprojectphasesbeginorareobligatedanddoesnotreflecttheactualflowoffundingandexpenditureswithinthesephases.Whilerehabilitationprogramswilltypicallyhavetheirfundingspread


acrossmanyyears,largecapitalprojectstendtohavetheirfundinglumpedintoasingleyearintheTIP,evenifthefundswillactuallybeexpendedoveranumberofyears,someofwhichmaybeoutsidethe4yearperiodoftheTIP.

Notesonassumptions:Inaddition,theanalysisassumesthatmodechoiceand

systemusageremainsconstantovertime.Systemexpansion,suchasanewtransitlineorhighway,andchangingconditions,suchasimprovementstoreliabilityandtravelcosts,tendtoinfluencetravelbehaviorovertime.However,thisanalysisassumesthattheusagederivedintherecenttravelsurveyandtransitpassengersurveysremainstaticovertime.Theclassificationofinvestmentsintoeitherroadwayortransitinvestmentsalsopresentssomelimitations.Forexample,classifyingapavementrehabilitationprojectasstrictlyroadwaydoesnotaccountforthebenefittotheregionstransitvehiclesthatsharethestreetwithprivateautomobiles.

Mappinglimitations:Mappingprojectsprovidesavisualrepresentationofthe

locationofprojectsinrelationtoCOCs.However,projectmappingalsopresentscertainlimitations.First,notallsignificantregionalinvestmentsaremappable.Forexample,asubstantialshareoftotalfundingintheTIPisdedicatedtotransitoperatorsforongoingmaintenanceoftheirentiresystem,whichcannotberepresentedasasimplepointorlineonamapinrelationtoaspecificcommunity.Second,displayinginvestmentsonamapdoesnottranslateintoadirectbenefitorburdenforthesurroundingcommunities.Giventheselimitations,themappinganalysisprovidesaqualitative,ratherthanquantitative,assessmentofthespatialdistributionofmappableprojectsincludedintheTIP.

Fundingandprojecttypes:Giventhedocumentsfederalfocus,theinvestmentsreflectedintheTIPrepresentonlyaboutaquarterofalltransportationinvestmentsintheBayAreaatanygiventime.Asaresult,theinvestmentanalysisdoesnotcapturetheequityimplicationsofmanylocallyfundedprojects.Localprojectstendtobesmaller,inbothgeographyandscope,butcollectively,theseprojectsareexpectedtohaveasignificantimpactontravelbehaviorsandexperiencesthroughouttheregion.

Demographicdata:Whilethelatestavailabledemographicdatawasusedinthe

investmentanalysis,somedatasetshavebeenupdatedmorerecentlythanothers.Theinformationfromthehouseholdtravelsurveyismorethan5yearsold,withdatacollectedfromhouseholdsbetween2012and2013.Thetransitpassengersurveydataismorerecent.However,theexactyearofdatacollectionvaries,asMTCconductsthesurveysbyoperatoronarollingbasis.Giventhepacewithwhichtravelpatternsandbehaviorshavechangedinrecentyears,theyearinwhichdataiscollectedisexpectedtoinfluencetheresultsoftheanalysis.


The2019TIPinvestmentanalysisincludesananalysisofinvestmentsbenefitingseniors.Unfortunately,asimilaranalysisforpersonswithdisabilitiesisnotincludedduetosamplesizelimitationsofthetravelsurvey,anddataunavailabilityfromthetransitpassengerdemographicsurvey.However,aqualitativediscussionofregionaltransportationinvestmentsthatbenefitseniorsandpersonswithdisabilitiesisincludedinthefollowingsection.


ANALYSIS RESULTS & DISCUSSION PopulationUseBasedResultsThepopulationusebasedanalysisisdividedintothreefocusareas:income,race/ethnicity,andseniors.Additionalinformationisalsoprovidedattheendofthissectiononregionaleffortsandinitiativestosupportandbetterunderstandthetransportationneedsofresidentswithtransportationrelateddisabilities.InvestmentsbyIncomeBayArearesidentslivinginlowincomehouseholds,earninglessthan$50,000peryear,accountfornearlyathirdofalltrips(27%)intheregion.Inthe2019TIP,32%ormorethan$4billionisdirectedtoprojectssupportingtripsmadebyresidentsfromlowincomehouseholds.Theshareoftheseinvestmentssupportinglowincometripsexceedstheshareoftripsmadebypersonsfromlowincomehouseholdsbyapproximately5%.SeeTable6andFigures2and3foradditionaldetail.TABLE6.2019TIPInvestmentsandTripsbyIncome

2019TIPInvestments(in$billions)

%ofInvestment

%ofTrips

LowIncome $4.3 32% 27%$150,000 $2.7 20% 23%

Total $13.2 100% 100%FIGURE2.2019TIPInvestmentsandTripsbyIncomeCategory

16% 16% 15% 15% 18% 20%11% 17% 16% 14% 20% 23%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

$150K

%ofInvestment%ofTrips

Source:Draft2019TIPandCaliforniaHouseholdTravelSurvey


FIGURE3.2019TIPInvestmentsandLowIncomeTrips

Similarly,theshareofinvestmentsinprojectsthatsupporttravelmadebylowincomepopulations(24%)slightlyexceedstheirusageshareofthetransportationsystemintermsofshareofthetotaldistancetraveled(22%)vehiclemilestraveled(VMT)forautotripsandorigindestinationdistancefortransittrips.SeeTable7andFigure4. TABLE7.2019TIPInvestmentsandTravelDistancebyIncome

2019TIPInvestments

(in$billions)%of

Investment

%ofTotalTravel

DistanceLowIncome $3.1 24% 22%$150,000 $3.2 24% 25%

Total $13.2 100% 100%FIGURE4.2019TIPInvestmentsandTravelDistancebyIncomeCategory

32% 27%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

ShareofInvestmentforTripsmadebyLowIncomePopulation

ShareofTripsbyLowIncomePopulation


10%14% 14% 15% 22% 24%

7%15% 16% 15% 22% 25%0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

$150K

%ofInvestment

%ofTravelDistance



Theanalysisindicatesthattheshareofinvestmentsinlocalroad,statehighwayandtollbridgesystemsthatbenefitdriverslivinginlowincomehouseholds(21%)isverysimilartotheshareoftotalVMTbydriverslivinginlowincomehouseholds(22%).SeeTable8andFigure5.TABLE8.2019TIPRoadwayInvestmentsandTravelDistancebyIncomeIncludesLocalStreetsandRoads,StateHighway,PublicLands/Trails,Port/FreightRailandTollBridge

2019TIPRoadwayInvestments(in$billions)

%ofInvestment

%ofTotalTravel

Distance*LowIncome $1.3 21% 22%$150,000 $1.7 27% 26%

Total $6.3 100% 100%*Totaltraveldistanceisvehiclemilestraveled(VMT)forallnontransittripsasderivedfromtheCaliforniaHouseholdTravelSurvey.FIGURE5.2019TIPRoadwayInvestmentsandTravelDistancebyIncomeIncludesLocalStreetsandRoads,StateHighway,PublicLands/Trails,Port/FreightRailandTollBridge

Theshareoftransitinvestmentsinthe2019TIPforpassengerslivinginlowincomehouseholds(40%)fallsshortoftheshareoftransittripsbypassengerslivinginlowincomehouseholds(47%).TABLE9.2019TIPTransitInvestmentsandTransitTripsbyIncome

2019TIPTransitInvestments

(in$billions)%ofTransitInvestment

%ofPassengerTransitTrips

LowIncome $2.8 40% 47%NotLowIncome $4.2 60% 53%Total $7.0 100% 100%

6% 15% 16% 15% 21%27%7% 15% 16% 15% 22%

26%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

$150K

%ofRoadwayInvestments%ofVehicleMilesTraveled(VMT)



FIGURE6.2019TIPTransitInvestmentsandPassengerTripsbyIncome

InvestmentsbyRace/EthnicityMinorityhouseholdsmakeup60%oftheregionspopulationandaccountfor52%ofalltrips.TheshareoftransportationinvestmentsintheBayAreathatsupportminoritypopulationtrips(57%)isgreaterthantheshareoftripstakenbythesepopulations(52%).TABLE10.2019TIPInvestmentsandTripsbyRace/Ethnicity

2019TIPInvestmentsbyTrips(in$billions)

%ofInvestment %ofTrips

NonMinority $5.7 43% 48%Minority $7.5 57% 52%Total $13.2 100% 100%

FIGURE7.2019TIPInvestmentsandTripsbyRace/Ethnicity

Theminorityhouseholdpopulationsaccountforapproximatelyhalf(50%)ofalltravel

40% 47%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

ShareofTransitInvestmentforLowIncomePassengers

ShareofTransitTripsbyLowIncomePassengers

Sources:Draft2019TIPandTransitPassengerDemographicSurvey(MTC)andBARTCustomerSatisfactionSurvey

43%57%48% 52%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

NonMinority Minority

%ofInvestmentbyTrips%ofTotalTrips



distance,asmeasuredbyVMTofroadwaytripsandorigindestinationdistancefortransittrips.Theshareofinvestmentssupportingminoritytravelbydistance(52%)isslightlymorethantheshareoftraveldistancetraversedbytheminoritypopulations(50%).TABLE11.2019TIPInvestmentsandTravelDistancebyRace/Ethnicity

2019TIPInvestmentsbyTravelDistance

(in$billions)%of

Investment%ofTravel

DistanceNonMinority $6.4 48% 50%Minority $6.8 52% 50%Total $13.2 100% 100%

FIGURE8.2019TIPInvestmentsandTravelDistancebyRace/Ethnicity

Personsfromminorityhouseholdsaccountforhalfofallroadwaytraveldistance,asmeasuredbyVMT.Theshareofinvestmentssupportingminorityroadwaytravelbydistance(50%)isroughlyequivalenttotheoverallshareofVMTtraveledbyminoritypopulations(49%).TABLE12.2019TIPRoadwayInvestmentsandTravelDistance(VMT)byRace/EthnicityIncludesLocalStreetsandRoads,StateHighway,PublicLands/Trails,Port/FreightRailandTollBridge

2019TIPInvestmentsbyVMT(in$billions)

%ofInvestment %ofVMT

NonMinority $3.1 50% 51%Minority $3.1 50% 49%Total $6.3 100% 100%

48% 52%50% 50%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%


%InvestmentbyTravelDistance%ofTravelDistance



FIGURE9.2019TIPRoadwayInvestmentsandTravelDistance(VMT)byRace/EthnicityIncludesLocalStreetsandRoads,StateHighway,PublicLands/Trails,Port/FreightRailandTollBridge

Nearlytwothirds(63%)oftransittripsintheBayAreaaretakenbyresidentsidentifyingasaracialorethnicminority.Theshareofinvestmentsinthe2019TIPthatsupportthesetransittrips(67%)isslightlymorethantheshareoftransittripsmadebyminoritypopulations(63%).TABLE13.2019TIPTransitInvestmentsandTransitTripsbyRace/Ethnicity

2019TIPInvestmentsbyTransitTrips

(in$billions)%of

Investment%ofTransit

TripsNonMinority $2.3 33% 37%Minority $4.6 67% 63%Total $7.0 100% 100%

FIGURE10.2019TIPTransitInvestmentsandTransitTripsbyRace/Ethnicity

50% 50%51% 49%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%


%ofInvestmentbyVMT

%ofVMT


33%

67%

37%

63%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%


%ofInvestmentbyTrips%ofPassengerTrips

Sources:Draft2019TIPandTransitPassengerDemographicSurvey(MTC)andBARTCustomerSatisfactionSurvey


InvestmentsbySeniorsSeniors,definedforthisanalysisaspersonsovertheageof65,accountfornearly14%oftheregionspopulation.Theshareoftransportationinvestmentsthatsupporttripstakenbyseniors(10%)isslightlylessthan,butroughlyequivalentto,theirshareoftrips(11%).TABLE14.2019TIPInvestmentsandTripsbySeniors

2019TIPInvestmentsbyTrips

(in$billions)%of

Investment %ofTripsSenior $1.3 10% 11%NonSenior $11.9 90% 89%Total $13.2 100% 100%

FIGURE11.2019TIPInvestmentsandTripsbySeniors

Seniorsalsoaccountfor10%ofalltraveldistance,asmeasuredbyVMTofroadwaytripsandorigin/destinationdistancefortransittrips.Thisisroughlyequivalenttotheirshareoftheinvestments(8%)supportingdistancetravelledbyseniorpopulations.TABLE15.2019TIPInvestmentsandTravelDistancebySeniors

2019TIPInvestmentsbyTravelDistance

(in$billions)%of

Investment%ofTravel

DistanceSenior $1.0 8% 10%NonSenior $12.2 92% 90%Total $13.2 100% 100%

10%

90%

11%

89%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Seniors NonSeniors

%ofInvestmentbyTrips%ofTotalTrips

Source:2019TIPandCaliforniaHouseholdTravelSurvey


FIGURE12.2019TIPInvestmentsandTravelDistancebySeniors

Forroadwaytravel,seniorsaccountfor10%ofallVMTandbenefitfromanequivalentshareofinvestments.TABLE16.2019TIPRoadwayInvestmentsandTravelDistance(VMT)bySeniorsIncludesLocalStreetsandRoads,StateHighway,PublicLands/Trails,Port/FreightRailandTollBridge

2019TIPInvestmentsbyVMT

(in$billions)%of

Investment %ofVMTSenior $0.6 10% 10%NonSenior $5.6 90% 90%Total $6.3 100% 100%

FIGURE13.2019TIPRoadwayInvestmentsandTravelDistance(VMT)bySeniorsIncludesLocalStreetsandRoads,StateHighway,PublicLands/Trails,Port/FreightRailandTollBridge

Giventhelimitationsofthedataavailable,adetailedlookatinvestmentsbytransittriplengthbypassengerageisnotincludedinthepopulationusebasedanalysis.

8%

92%

10%

90%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Senior NonSenior

%InvestmentbyTravelDistance%ofTravelDistance


10%

90%

10%

90%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Senior NonSenior

%ofInvestmentbyVMT%ofVMT

Source:2019TIPandCaliforniaHouseholdTravelSurvey


SupplementalInformationPersonswithTransportationRelatedDisabilitiesLimitationsinthedataavailablemakeitdifficulttoquantifytransportationsystemusageofpersonswithdisabilitiestothedegreenecessaryforthepopulationusebasedanalysis.However,transportationinvestmentsbenefitingthesepopulationsarebeingmadethroughouttheregion.Belowisanoverviewofregionalinvestmentsandplanninginitiativesthatsupporttransportationbypersonswithdisabilities.AlistoftransitprojectscompliantwiththeAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct(ADA)isincludedAppendixA49.

CommunityBasedTransportationPlanning(CBTP)ProvidesplanningfundsfordevelopingprojectrecommendationsineachoftheregionsCommunitiesofConcern(COCs).PersonswithdisabilitiesareoneofeightfactorsthatareusedtodetermineCOCdesignations.Todate,fortyoneCBTPsat$60,000eachhavebeencompletedforthesecommunities.AnewroundoffundingforupdatedCBTPsisexpectedinthefallof2018.

LifelineTransportationProgramProvidesfundstoaddressmobilityneedsoflow

incomeresidents,includingseniorsandindividualswithdisabilities.FundingisusedtosupportprojectsfromCBTPs.Historically,$20millionhasbeenprovidedannually.

FTASection5310EnhancedMobilityofSeniors&IndividualswithDisabilities

Providescapitalandoperatinggrantstoprivatenonprofitandpublicagenciestoimprovemobilityforseniorsandindividualswithdisabilitiesbyremovingbarrierstoandexpandingservices.Inthelastroundoffunding,$13.2millioninawardsweremadeintheregionslargeurbanizedareas.Theregionssmallurbanizedareasreceived$1.4millioninawards.

TransitCapitalPrioritiesProvidesanoptionalADAsetasideof10%oftheFTA

Section5307largeurbanizedareaapportionment.Operatorsmayusethisfundingtodefraytheoperatingcostsoftheirparatransitsystems.Annually,thisamountstoapproximately$20million.

StateTransitAssistanceHistorically,aportionofSTAPopulationBasedfundsweresetasideforoperatorstouseinordertodefraytheoperatingcostsoftheirparatransitsystems.WiththeadoptionofMTCResolutionNo.4321inFebruary2018,70%ofallSTAPopulationBasedfundsnowflowtoeachcountyCongestionManagementAgencythroughtheSTACountyBlockGrantand30%isdirectedtotheRegionalProgrammanagedbyMTC.ParatransitoperationsareaneligibleuseoftheCountyBlockGrantprogram.

MTCsCoordinatedPublicTransitHumanServicesTransportationPlan

Identifiesthetransportationneedsofindividualswithdisabilities,olderadults,andindividualswithlimitedincome,andidentifiesfundingprioritiesandcoordinationstrategiesformeetingtheseneeds.TheCoordinatedPlanisintendedtomeetthefederalplanningrequirementsaswellastoprovideMTCanditsregionalpartners


withablueprintforimplementingarangeofstrategiesintendedtopromoteandadvancelocaleffortstoimprovetransportationforpersonswithdisabilities,olderadults,andpersonswithlowincomes.MTCstaffworkswithstakeholdersthroughouttheregiontogatherinputontransportationgaps,aswellassolutionsthataretheneligibleforfederalfundingthroughtheSection5310program.TheCoordinatedPlanwaslastupdatedin2018.

Caltransrecentlyawardeda$407,000granttoMTCandtheWorldInstituteonDisability(WID)forapilotprojectfocusedonidentifyingandaddressingaccessandmobilityneedsofpeoplewithdisabilitiesintheBayArea.Theprojectwillexplorewaystoexpandinstitutionalcapacityattransitandparatransitserviceproviders,countycongestionmanagementagencies,localjurisdictionsandregionalagenciestobetterunderstandandaddressaccessandmobilityneedsofpeoplewithadisability.MTCwillpartnerwithWIDtoengagecommunitybasedorganizationsandotherstakeholderstodevelopamethodologyandprocessforcollectingdataandupdatingaregionalneedsassessments.Theprojectisanticipatedtostartinfall2018andendbyMarch2020.


DisparateImpactAnalysisThesecondcomponentoftheinvestmentanalysisincludesacloserlookatfederalandstatetransitinvestments.Thefederalandstatefundingsourcesforpublictransportationaccountforonlyasmallportion(13%)offundinginthe2019TIP,asillustratedbelowinFigure11.FIGURE11.2019TIPTransitInvestmentsfromFederal/StateSourcesasaShareofAllInvestments

Although40%oftheTIPismadeupofregionalorlocalinvestmentsinpublictransit,itisimportanttonotethatasubstantialshareoftotalfundingdedicatedtotransitoperatorsforongoingoperationsandmaintenancearenotincludedintheTIP.Thisfundingcomesfromstate,regionalandlocalsourcesandmaynotbecapturedintheTIPastheseprojectsandprogramsdonottypicallyrequireafederalaction.Thedisparateimpactanalysisindicatesthattheshareoffederalandstatetransitinvestmentsdistributedtotransitservicesupportingminoritypopulationsvaryascomparedtorespectivesharesofregionaltransitridershipandregionalpopulation.TABLE17.2019TIPFederal/StateTransitInvestmentsbyMinorityStatus

Federal/StateTransit

Investments($millions)

%ofTotalFederal/State

TransitFunding

%ofRegionalTransit

Ridership

%ofTotalRegional

PopulationMinority $1,025 62% 63% 60%NonMinority $640 38% 37% 40%Total $1,665 100% 100% 100%

LocalStreetsandRoads,StateHighwaysandTollBridgeInvestments47%

Federal/StateTransitInvestments13%

Regional/LocalTransitInvestments40%

Source:Draft2019TIP


Investmentsdistributedonapercapitabasisindicatethatminoritypopulationsintheregionarereceiving$221inbenefitsperperson,morethanthe$210inbenefitsperpersonfornonminoritypopulations(or105%ofthebenefitsreceivedbynonminorityresidents).TABLE18.2019TIPFederal/StateTransitInvestments,DisparateImpactAnalysisbyPopulation



RegionalPopulation

PerCapitaBenefit

MinorityperCapitaBenefitas%ofNonMinorityPerCapitaBenefit

Minority $1,025 4,634,040 $221 105%Nonminority $640 3,049,971 $210 Total $1,665 7,684,011 $217

Investmentsdistributedonapertransitriderbasisindicatethatminoritypopulationsintheregionreceive$1,007inbenefitsperrider,slightlylessthan$1,089inbenefitspertransitriderfornonminoritypopulations(or92%ofthebenefitsreceivedbynonminorityresidents).TABLE19.2019TIPFederal/StateTransitInvestments,DisparateImpactAnalysisbyBoardings



AverageDailyTransit

RidershipPerRiderBenefit

MinorityperRiderBenefitas

%ofNonMinorityPerRiderBenefit

Minority $1,025 1,018,086 $1,007 92%Nonminority $640 587,771 $1,089 Total $1,129 1,605,856 $1,037

TransportationEquityMeasuresHealthyandSafeCommunitiesProjectsthatareexpectedtocontributetowardsreachingourregionalgoalsforhealthyandsafecommunitiesincludeprojectsthatimproveroadsafety,increasephysicalactivity,andimproveairquality.

RoadSafety:Inthe2019TIP,morethan160projectsandnearly$2billioninfundingaredirectedtoprojectsthatareidentifiedbyprojectsponsorsashavingaprimarypurposeofimprovingroadsafetyorthatareotherwiseanticipatedtosignificantlyreducefatalitiesandseriousinjuries

Table20.2019TIPRoadSafetyImprovements

County Projects Investments

Alameda 40 $368ContraCosta 26 $169Marin 10 $28Napa 10 $36SanFrancisco 10 $65SanMateo 25 $38SantaClara 24 $278Solano 11 $37Sonoma 5 $11Multiple 3 $696 164 $1,726


duetotrafficcollisions(Table20).Itisimportanttonotethatmanyotherprojectsinthe2019TIPareanticipatedtohaveamoderateorslightpositiveimpactontransportationsafety.However,thisanalysisfocusesonthoseprojectsthathavesafetyimprovementasaprimarypurposeorthatareotherwiseanticipatedtoleadtosignificantreductionsintransportationfatalitiesandseriousinjuriescausedbytrafficcollisions.Someofthelargestsafetyinvestmentsinthe2019TIPinclude: $545millionforvariousStateHighwayOperationandProtection

Program(SHOPP)CollisionReductionprojects $102millionforvariousSHOPPSafetyImprovementMandatesprojects,

whichareprimarilyfocusedonensuringcompliancewiththeAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct(ADA)

$62millionforI680/SR4InterchangeReconstructionPhase3inContraCostaCounty

$49millionforvariouslocalHighwaySafetyImprovementProgramprojects

$22millionforMcKeeRdandTullyRdSafetyImprovementsinSanJose

Additionalinformationisprovidedonprojectsthatareexpectedtoimprovethesafetyofourroadsforpedestriansandbicyclists.AsshowninTable21,$1.3billionisinvestedin77projectsinthe2019TIPthatareidentifiedbytheprojectsponsorsasanticipatedtohaveasignificantimpactonreducingfatalitiesandseriousinjuriesforpedestriansandbicyclists.Safetyofthetransportationsystemincludesmorethanjustthereductionofcollisions.Projectsunrelatedtoreducingcollisionscanalsohavesignificantimpactsonsafetytothetravelingpublic,includingseismicretrofits,securityimprovements,andresiliencyprojects.The2019TIPalsoincludesasignificantinvestmentintheGoldenGateBridgeSuicideDeterrentSafetyBarrier,whichaimstoimpedetheabilityofindividualstojumpoffthebridgeresultinginasaferenvironmentforthelandmarktransportationfacility.ThisprojectwasnotincludedintheHealthyandSafeCommunitiesmeasureforthisanalysis,butdoeshaveanimportantsafetypurpose.

Table21.2019TIPSafetyImprovementsforPedestrians&Bicyclists


Alameda 28 $334ContraCosta 3 $23Marin 6 $22Napa 5 $28SanFrancisco 6 $47SanMateo 11 $23SantaClara 13 $237Solano 1 $1Sonoma 2 $1MultipleCounties 2 $594 77 $1,311


PhysicalActivity:TheTIPincludes136projectsandover$400millioninvestedonprojectsthatareprimarilyfocusedonbicycleandpedestrianimprovementsandprograms,whichenableandencourageactivetransportation.Someofthelargestbicycleandpedestrianinvestmentsinthe2019TIPinclude: $17millionforImprovedBike/PedAccesstoEastSpanoftheSan

FranciscoEastBayBridge $14millionfortheIronHorseTrailBikeandPedestrianOvercrossingin

ContraCostaCounty $13millionforOaklands14thStSafeRoutesintheCityproject $12millionfortheNorthSouthGreenwayCapClosureinMarinCounty

ManyprojectsintheTIPthatarefocusedonothermodesorpurposesalsoincludeimprovementsthatbenefitbicyclistsorpedestrians,suchasapavementrehabilitationprojectthatincludesaddinganewbikelane.Projectsponsorsreporttheshareofeachprojectstotalprojectcostthatcanbeattributedtothevariousmodesthatwillbenefitfromtheproject.Table22displayscountyandregionalinvestmentsinbike/pedestrianprojectsaswellasthetotaldollarsinvestedonallprojectsthatareanticipatedtobenefitbicyclistsandpedestriansoverthefouryearTIPperiod,asreportedbytheprojectsponsors.

Table22.2019TIPBike&PedestrianInvestments

Bicycle&PedestrianProjectsProjectswithBicycle&PedestrianElements

County Projects Investments Projects InvestmentsAlameda 26 $136 50 $137ContraCosta 17 $59 47 $69Marin 10 $26 15 $31Napa 6 $12 12 $18SanFrancisco 10 $26 17 $45SanMateo 20 $28 40 $32SantaClara 32 $97 60 $200Solano 8 $19 15 $24Sonoma 6 $8 16 $12MultipleCounties 1 $3 3 $5 136 $413 276 $573

AirQuality:ProjectsfundedwithfederalCongestionMitigationAirQuality

ImprovementProgram(CMAQ),CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard(CARB),orregionalTransportationforCleanAir(TFCA)fundsareexpectedtoimproveairqualitythroughpromotingcleanertechnologiesoralternativemodesoftransportation.Manyotherprojectsinthe2019TIPmayalsosupportimprovedairquality,butthisanalysisfocusedonprojectsfundedwithairqualityspecificfundsources(Table23).


Afewoftheprojectsfundedthroughairqualityfundingprogramsinthe2019TIPinclude: $50millionforBARTRailcarProcurement $12millionforElectricVehicleInfrastructure/VehicleBuybackprograms $10millionforMTCsClipper2.0FareCollectionSystem $10millionforACEsLocomotiveProcurementproject $7millionforSFMTAsGearyBusRapidTransitproject $5millionforMTCsSparetheAirprogram

Maps:2019TIPHealthy&SafeCommunities

Safetyandactivetransportationprojectsaremapped,wherepossible,bycountyandoverlaidagainstCommunitiesofConcerntodisplaytheoverallspatialdistributionofprojectsthatsupporttheregionsgoalstoimprovethehealthandsafetyofregion.Thesemapscanbeviewedstartingon

pages34.Theseprojectscanalsobeviewedonaninteractivewebmapthatincludeadditionaldataonspatialconcentrationsbyraceandethnicity(https://mtc.ca.gov/ourwork/fundinvest/transportationimprovementprogram).EconomicVitalityProjectsthatreducecongestion,improvereliability,orimprovetransitserviceorcapacityaremostlikelytosupporttheregionalgoaltoincreasetheshareofjobsaccessiblewithin30minutesbycaror45minutesbytransitincongestedconditions.

RoadCongestion/Reliability:Thereare102roadwayprojectsinthe2019TIP,totalingabout$2billion,whichareidentifiedbyprojectsponsorsashavingaprimarypurposeofreducingcongestionorimprovingsystemreliabilityorareotherwiseanticipatedtosignificantlyimprovecongestionorreliability(Table24).

Table23.2019TIPAirQualityFocusedInvestmentsCounty Projects InvestmentsAlameda 12 $51ContraCosta 10 $22Marin 6 $5Napa 3 $4SanFrancisco 2 $10SanMateo 13 $9SantaClara 25 $50Solano 8 $10Sonoma 3 $4Multiple 12 $83 94 $248


Afewoftheseprojectsinthe2019TIPinclude:

$473millionforUS101ManagedLanes:SanMateoCountySouthofGrandAvetoSantaClaraCountyLine

$167millionforvariousSHOPPMobilityProgramprojects

$142millionforUS101/ZankerRoadSkyportDriveN.FourthSt.ImprovementsinSantaClaraCounty

$66millionforI680SBHOVLaneCompletioninContraCostaCounty

$47millionfortheEastWestConnectorinFremontandUnionCity

$22millionfor511NextGenTravelerInformation

TransitService/Capacity:Thereare33transitprojectsinthe2019TIP,totalingnearly$5billion,whichareidentifiedbyprojectsponsorsashavingaprimarypurposeofreducingcongestionorimprovingsystemreliabilityorareotherwiseanticipatedtosignificantlyimprovecongestionorreliability(Table25).Afewoftheseprojectsinthe2019TIPinclude:

$2.6billionfortheBARTBerryessatoSanJoseExtension

$1.1billionfortheBARTTransbayCoreCapacityImprovements

$598millionfortheTransbayTerminal/CaltrainDowntownExtensionPhase2

$268millionforVTAsEastridgetoBARTRegionalConnector

$128millionforCaltrainsPeninsulaCorridorElectrificationExpansion

$54millionforSFMTAsAdditionalLightRailVehiclestoExpandMuniRailService

Table24.2019TIPRoadwayCongestion/ReliabilityInvestmentsCounty Projects InvestmentsAlameda 22 $344ContraCosta 15 $159Marin 2 $20Napa 5 $34SanFrancisco 6 $21SanMateo 15 $550SantaClara 18 $580Solano 2 $28Sonoma 3 $9Multiple 14 $238

102 $1,984

Table25.2019TIPTransitService/CapacityImprovementsCounty Projects InvestmentsAlameda 4 $20ContraCosta 2 $8Marin 2 $2Napa SanFrancisco 12 $678SanMateo 3 $141SantaClara 3 $2,842Solano 1 $2Sonoma Multiple 6 $1,099 33 $4,793


Maps:2019TIPEconomicVitality

Roadcongestionorreliabilityprojectsandtransitserviceorcapacityimprovementprojectsaremapped,wherepossible,bycountyandoverlaidagainstCommunitiesofConcerntodisplaytheoverallspatialdistributionofprojectsthatsupporttheregionsgoalstoimproveeconomicvitality.

Thesemapscanbeviewedstartingonpage34.Theseprojectscanalsobeviewedonaninteractivewebmapthatincludeadditionaldataonspatialconcentrationsbyraceandethnicity(https://mtc.ca.gov/ourwork/fundinvest/transportationimprovementprogram).TransportationSystemEffectivenessThetransportationsystemeffectivenessgoalareaencompassestwoperformancemeasures:improvedpavementconditionandtransitstateofgoodrepair.Projectsthatincludeapavementorbridgerehabilitationorpreservationcomponentorrehabilitateorreplaceexistingtransitassetsarecompiledforthisportionoftheanalysis.

PavementandBridgeCondition:Inthe2019TIP,97projectstotaling$2.5billionisinvestedinrehabilitationandpreservationofexistingroadsandbridges(Table26).Afewofthelargerrehabilitationprojectsinthe2019TIPinclude:

$1billionforvariousSHOPPRoadwayPreservationprojects

$583millionforvariousSHOPPBridgeRehabilitationandReconstructionprojects

$303millionfortheregionalTollBridgeRehabilitationProgram

$207millionforvariousLocalHighwayBridgeProgramprojects

TransitStateofGoodRepair:Thereare81transitstateofgoodrepairprojectsinthe

2019TIP,totaling$1.9billionincommittedinvestments.Thetransitinvestmentsinthe2019TIPinclude:

$737millionfortheBARTRailcarProcurementProgram $210millionfortheCaltrainElectrificationproject $67millionforSFMTAsRailReplacementProgram $62millionfortheClipper2.0FarePaymentSystem $59millionforGGBHTDsDieseltoHybridBusReplacementproject $50millionforVTAsStandardandSmallBusReplacementproject

Table26.2019TIPPavementandBridgeRehabilitationProjects


Alameda 14 $36ContraCosta 24 $49Marin 4 $8Napa 3 $6SanFrancisco 2 $200SanMateo 19 $17SantaClara 14 $46Solano 3 $3Sonoma 8 $16Multiple 6 $2,122 97 $2,504


Maps:2019TIPTransportationSystemEffectiveness

Pavementandbridgeconditionprojectsandtransitassetmanagementprojectsaremapped,wherepossible,bycountyandoverlaidagainstCommunitiesofConcerntodisplaytheoverallspatialdistributionofprojectsthatsupporttheregionsgoalstoimproveeconomicvitality.These

mapscanbeviewedstartingonpage34.Theseprojectscanalsobeviewedonaninteractivewebmapthatincludeadditionaldataonspatialconcentrationsbyraceandethnicity(https://mtc.ca.gov/ourwork/fundinvest/transportationimprovementprogram).EquitableAccessTheequitableaccessmeasureestimatestheshareofincomeconsumedbytransportationcostswithagoalofreducingthefinancialburdenontheregionslowestincomeresidents.Thisportionoftheanalysisincorporatesvariousoutputsfromtheregionaltraveldemandmodeltocalculatehouseholdtransportationcostsasashareofhouseholdincome.The2019TIPinvestmentsappeartohaveanegligibleeffectontheshareofincomespentontransportation,acrossallincomelevels,whencomparedtoascenarioinwhichnoneoftheprojectsinthe2019TIPiscompleted(Table28).

Table27.2019TIPTransitRehabilitation/ReplacementProjects

Sponsor Projects Investments Sponsor Projects Investments

ACTransit 5 $56 SamTrans 2 $2ACE 2 $25 SantaRosaBus 3 $5BART 10 $947 SFMTA 14 $326Caltrain 3 $246 SMART CCCTA SolTrans 2 $3ECCTA SonCoTransit 3 $5Fairfield 1 $2 UnionCityTransit 1 $2GGBHTD 12 $135 Vacaville LAVTA VTA 7 $92MCTD 5 $13 WCCTA 6 $9MTCClipper 1 $62 WETA 3 $41NVTA 1


Theseresultsdonotnecessarilyindicatethattheprojectsinthe2019TIPwillhavenoimpactonhouseholdtransportationcosts.Rather,itismorelikelythatthetravelmodelmaynotbeappropriateforassessingchangesintransportationcostsresultingfromTIPinvestments.Acoupleofnotesaboutthelimitationsofthisapproach:1. Althoughthereismorethan$13billionintransportationinvestmentsprogrammedin

the2019TIP,manyoftheseprojectswillnotbecompleteduntilafterthe2019TIPperiod.Forexample,majorprojectswithfundsprogrammedforconstructionin2022maynotbecompleteandopentothepublicforanotherseveralyears.Theimpactsoftheseinvestmentswerenotcapturedinthe2022modelyear,butcanbeassumedtohaveaneffectontripsandcost.

2. Fortheprojectsthatarecompletedby2022,onlyahandfulhaveascopethatisevaluatedinaregionaltravelmodel.Manylocalroadwayandtransitassetprojects,aswellasbicycleandpedestrianprojects,cannotbecapturedintheregionaltravelmodel,butarestillexpectedtohavesignificantcumulativeimpactsontravelintheregion.


2019TIPInvestmentAnalysisKeyFindingsEquitabledistributionofinvestmentsoverallTheresultsofthepopulationusebasedanalysisindicatethatoverall,theinvestmentsinthe2019TIPdirectanequitableproportionofinvestmentstoprojectsthatsupportthetransportationofresidentsoflowincomehouseholds,racialorethnicminorities,andseniors.

Theshareofinvestmentssupportingoveralllowincometrips(32%)andtripsmadebyminoritypopulations(57%)exceedstheshareoftripsmadebyeachgroup(27%and52%,respectively).

Theshareofinvestmentssupportingoveralltraveldistancebylowincomepopulations(24%)andminoritypopulations(52%)alsoslightlyexceedstheshareofoveralldistancetravelledbyeachgroup(22%and50%,respectively).

Theshareofinvestmentssupportingtrips(10%)andtraveldistance(8%)madebyseniorsisslightlyunder,butstillroughlyequivalent,totheirrelativeshareofeachmeasure(11and10%).

Variableresultsfortransit,duetosmallnumberofverylargeinvestmentsThereareafewvariancesworthnotinginthepopulationusedbasedanalysisanddisparateimpactanalysis,specificallyrelatedtotransit.

Theshareoftransitinvestmentsthatsupporttripsmadebypassengersinlow

incomehouseholds(40%)fallssomewhatshortofthesepassengersrelativeshareofthetransittripstaken(47%).

Federalandstatetransitinvestmentsresultinapercapitabenefitforminoritiesthatslightlyexceedsthepercapitabenefitfornonminorities(105%ofnonminoritypercapitabenefit).However,onapertransitriderbasis,federalandstatetransitinvestmentsfallshort,withaminorityperriderbenefitof92%ofthenonminorityperriderbenefit.

Thevariedresultsinthe2019TIPareattributedtoanumberoflargeprojects,including:

BARTsRailcarProcurementProgram; BARTsTransbayCoreCapacityImprovementsProgram; CaltrainElectrification; CaltrainsPeninsulaCorridorElectrificationExpansion;and TransbayJointPowerAuthoritysCaltrainDowntownExtension.

Together,thesefiveprojectsaccountforalmost40%ofalltransitfundinginthe2019TIP.Whenfocusingonlyonstateandfederalfunds,theseprojectsaccountforapproximately35%offundingintheTIPperiod.WhileBARTridershipapproximatelymirrorstheregionalridershipshareforminoritypopulations,theshareofBARTridersfromlowincomehouseholdsislessthantheregionalaverageshare.Caltrainisusedbyalowerproportionoflowincomeandminorityridersthantheregionalaveragefortransitriders.


Thedegreeofthevariancesseeninthe2019TIPdisparateimpacttransitanalysisarenotablyimprovedascomparedtothe2017TIP,withtheminoritypertransitriderinvestmentdisbenefitdecreasingfrom89%inthe2017TIPto92%inthe2019TIP.Inaddition,theminoritypercapitatransitinvestmentincreasesfrom96%ofthenonminoritypercapitainvestment(disbenefit)inthe2017TIPto105%ofthenonminoritypercapitainvestment(benefit)inthe2019TIP.Itisimportanttoreemphasize,thattheTIPdoesnotreflectthefullpictureoftransportationinvestmentsintheBayArea.TheTIPonlyincludesfouryearsofneartermfundprogrammingandtendsnottoincludeoperatingandmaintenancefunds,particularlyfortransit.AdditionoftransportationequitymeasuresprovidesopportunityforbetterunderstandingofpotentialequityimpactsForthe2019TIP,additionalinformationisprovidedonprojectsthatsupportPlanBayArea2040stransportationfocusedequitymeasures:HealthyandSafeCommunities,EconomicVitality,TransportationSystemEffectiveness,andEquitableAccess.Althoughtheanalysisdoesnotidentifydirectbenefitsandburdensresultingfromindividualinvestments,itbuildsuponthepopulationusebasedanddisparateimpactanalysestobetterunderstandthenatureoftheprojectsincludedinthe2019TIPandtheiranticipatedeffectsonlongtermregionalgoals.Dataforthetransportationequitymeasuresisselfreportedbyprojectsponsors,thereforetheresultinginformationislimitedbythequalityandconsistencyofthedataprovided.Wherepossible,projectssupportingthetransportationfocusedequitymeasureswerealsomappedtoillustratethelocationof2019investmentsinrelationtoadoptedCOCsaswellascensustractswithconcentrationsofminoritypopulationsthatareaboveregionalaverages.Thegeographicdisplayofprojectsallowsforexaminationandidentificationofanyapparentsystematicexclusionofcommunitiesinthespatialdistributionofbenefits,oranyapparentsystematicimbalancesbetweenthedistributionofprojectsbetweencommunitiesofconcernandtheremainderoftheregion,orbetweenminorityandnonminoritycommunities.Asnotedabove,manyprojectsandadditionaldatacanbeviewedonaninteractivewebmapavailableonhttps://mtc.ca.gov/ourwork/fundinvest/transportationimprovementprogram.

2019 TIP Investment AnalysisAlameda County Project List

1 AC Transit: East Bay Bus Rapid Transit 39 BART: Traction Power System Renovation2 AC Transit: San Pablo and Telegraph Ave Rapid Bus Upgrades 40 BART:ADA Paratransit Capital Accessibility Improve3 ACE: Platform Extensions 41 BATA: Toll Bridge Maintenance4 ACTC: 7th Street Grade Separation East 42 BATA: Toll Bridge Rehabilitation Program5 ACTC: 7th Street Grade Separation West 43 Berkeley: John Muir Safe Routes to School6 ACTC: East-West Connector in Fremont & Union City 44 Berkeley: Sacramento Street Complete Streets Improvements7 ACTC: Freight Intelligent Transportation System (FITS) 45 Berkeley: Southside Complete Streets & Transit Improvement8 ACTC: I-580/680 Interchange HOV/HOT Widening 46 Caltrans: Oakland to San Jose Double Track (Segment 2A)9 ACTC: I-680 NB HOV/HOT Lane 47 Dublin: Dublin Blvd-North Canyons Pkwy Extension10 ACTC: I-80 Gilman Interchange Reconfiguration 48 Dublin: Dublin Blvd Rehabilitation11 ACTC: I-80/Ashby Avenue Interchange Improvements 49 Dublin: Dublin Boulevard widening12 ACTC: I-880 NB HOV/HOT: North of Hacienda to Hegenberger 50 Dublin: I-580 Interchange Imps at Hacienda/Fallon Rd, Ph 213 ACTC: I-880/Industrial Parkway West Interchange 51 EBRPD: Doolittle Drive Bay Trail 14 ACTC: I-880/West Winton Avenue Interchange 52 Emeryville: Frontage Rd, 65th St and Powell St Pavement Maint15 ACTC: I-880/Whipple Road Interchange Improvements 53 Emeryville: Greenway Crossing Improvements 16 ACTC: Oakland/Alameda Freeway Access Project 54 Fremont: Complete Streets Upgrade of Relinquished SR-8417 ACTC: SR-262 (Mission Blvd) Improvements 55 Fremont: Pavement Rehabilitation18 ACTC: SR-84 widening, South of Ruby Hills Dr to I-680 56 Fremont: Widen Kato Rd from Warren Ave to Milmont Dr19 ACTC: Widen I-680 NB and SB for EL from SR-84 to Alcosta 57 Hayward: I-880 Auxiliary lanes at Industrial Parkway20 Alameda County: Cherryland/Ashland/CastroValley/Fairview BikePed 58 Hayward: I-880/A Street Interchange Reconstruction21 Alameda County: Crow Canyon Safety Improvements 59 Hayward: Main Street Complete Street22 Alameda County: Estuary Bridges Seismic Retrofit and Repairs 60 Hayward: Rt 92/Clawiter/Whitesell Interchange Improvements23 Alameda County: Fruitvale Ave Roadway Bridge Retrofit 61 Hayward: Winton Ave Complete Street 24 Alameda County: Niles Canyon Rd (SR-84)/Pleas-Sunol Rd I/C Imps 62 Livermore: Pavement Rehabilitation - MTS Routes25 Alameda County: Various Streets and Roads Preservation 63 MTC: Bay Bridge Forward-Commuter Parking Initiative26 Alameda County: Vasco Road Safety Improvements 64 MTC: Bay Bridge Forward-West Grand HOV/Bus Only Lane27 Alameda: Central Avenue Safety Improvements 65 MTC: Bay Bridge Forward-West Grand TSP28 Alameda: City-Wide Pavement Rehabilitation 66 MTC: Bay Bridge Park29 Alameda: Clement Avenue Complete Streets 67 MTC: Bike Share Capital Program (Fremont)30 Albany: San Pablo Ave & Buchanan St Pedestrian Improvements 68 MTC: Freeway Performance Program-I-880 Corridor31 BART Car Exchange (Preventive Maintenance) 69 MTC: Freeway Performance Program-SR-8432 BART Train Control Renovation 70 MTC: I-880 Integrated Corridor Management-Central 33 BART Transbay Core Capacity Improvements 71 MTC: Improved Bike/Ped Access to East Span of SFOBB34 BART: 19th Street BART Station Modernization-GO Uptown 72 Newark: Thornton Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation35 BART: Bay Fair Connection 73 Oakland: 14th St Safe Routes in the City36 BART: Fare Collection Equipment 74 Oakland: 19th St BART to Lake Merritt Urban Greenway37 BART: Rail, Way and Structures Program 75 Oakland: 35th Ave Bike/Ped Improvements 38 BART: Railcar Procurement Program 76 Oakland: 42nd Ave. & High St I-880 Access Improvements

Draft 2019 TIP Page 34

2019 TIP Investment AnalysisAlameda County Project List (Continued)

77 Oakland: Army Base Infrastructure Improvements78 Oakland: Crossing to Safety79 Oakland: Fruitvale Alive Gap Closure Project80 Oakland: Fruitvale Ave Bike/Ped Improvements81 Oakland: Lake Merritt to Bay Trail Bike/Ped Bridge82 Oakland: Lakeside Family Streets83 Oakland: Shattuck and Claremont Bike/Ped Improvements84 Oakland: Telegraph Ave Bike/Ped Improvements and Road Diet85 Oakland: Telegraph Avenue Complete Streets86 Oakland: Waterfront Bay Trail87 Piedmont: Oakland Avenue Improvements88 Pleasanton: Pavement Rehabilitation Hacienda Business Park89 San Leandro: SR 185-E. 14th St/ Hesperian Blvd/150th Ave90 San Leandro: Washington Avenue Rehabilitation91 Union City: Dyer Street Pavement Rehabilitation92 WETA: Ferry Service-Berkeley

NOT MAPPEDAC Transit: ADA Paratransit Assistance Union City Transit: Replace Heavy-Duty Transit Vehicles

AC Transit: Paratransit Van Replacement Union City Transit: Travel Time Improvements

AC Transit: Purchase (10) 24ft Cut-aways

AC Transit: Purchase (24) 60ft Artic Hybrid Buses

AC Transit: Replace (27) 40ft Urban Buses - Hybrid

AC Transit: Replace (6) 24ft Cut-Away Vans

ACE: Fixed Guideway (Capital Lease)

ACE: Locomotive Procurement

ACE: Railcar Midlife Overhaul

ACTC: Alameda Safe Routes to School

Alameda County: Active Oakland Safe Routes to School

Caltrans: Alameda County - TOS-Mobility

LAVTA: ADA Paratransit Operating Subsidy

LAVTA: Livermore Transit Center Rehabilitation and Improvement

MTC: Bay Bridge Forward - Casual Carpool

MTC: Bay Bridge Forward - Integrated Bridge Corridor

MTC: Bay Bridge Forward - Commuter Parking Initiative O&M

MTC: Regional Planning Activities and PPM - Alameda County

Oakland: Local Streets and Roads Paving

Union City Transit: ADA Paratransit Operating Subsidy


680

61

80

804

262

84

84

84

680

92

238

238

185

61

880

238

880

24

13

13

123

80

580

580

580

580

84

24

680

101

101

880

1281011011011041041288121521523333140555331321082199955801323333120991204129954889958510112810111111612812125051215223729580168068061801132208412293725156152152101101130680880878217859280358435353511182380280353511280101221121128128128292912126808080131371211161210110110111444424278080262848484680929223823818561880238880241313123808058058058058084241934529880236160881401085261018024680101101165080659999705113113516165329175101128132280171018801717992361115216016084599205

Oakland

Hayward

Berkeley

San Mateo

Pleasanton

Alameda

Union City

Redwood City

Livermore

San Leandro

Albany

Hillsborough

Dublin

Moraga

Foster City

Orinda

Tracy

San Ramon

Lafayette

East Palo Alto

Burlingame

Belmont

Emeryville

San Carlos

Piedmont

Danville

Newark

Fremont

13

11

43

7

3030

30

1616

6671

15

53

4410

60

24

58

17

14

78

67

21

9

19

79

75

48

26

18

83

83

74

12

27 29

5454

4

86

86 86

8686

86

8686

86

86

8485

73

8082

45

51

5

20

57

56

81

49

8 8

6

MTC Community of Concern(ACS 2012-2016)

Active Transportation Project

Safety Project

Safety and Active Transportation Project

Note: maps include only mappable projects. For non-mappable projects, refer to county project lists.

Map Author: JC 4/27/2018Original Files: https://mtcdrive.box.com/s/7cewm4m1ro77q0syr74g03a39wp5ebgq

2019 TIP Investment AnalysisAlameda County: Healthly and Safe Communities Projects


680

61

80

804

262

84

84

84

680

92

238

238

185

61

880

238

880

24

13

13

123

80

580

580

580

580

84

24

680

101

101

880

1281011011011041041288121521523333140555331321082199955801323333120991204129954889958510112810111111612812125051215223729580168068061801132208412293725156152152101101130680880878217859280358435353511182380280353511280101221121128128128292912126808080131371211161210110110111444424278080262848484680929223823818561880238880241313123808058058058058084241934529880236160881401085261018024680101101165080659999705113113516165329175101128132280171018801717992361115216016084599205

Oakland

Walnut Creek

Hayward

Berkeley

San Mateo

Pleasanton

Alameda

Union City

Redwood City

Livermore

San Leandro

Albany

Hillsborough

Dublin

Moraga

Foster City

Orinda

Tracy

San Ramon

Lafayette

East Palo Alto

Burlingame

Belmont

Emeryville

San Carlos

Piedmont

Danville

Newark

Fremont

89

13

11

716

16

15

5050

10

60

3

358

17

14

35

6363

63

67

9

19

92 38

38

38

38

38

18

12

70

654

64

5

57

49

1

8

8

2

2

6

46

33

33

33

33

33

68

69


Roadway Congestion and/or ReliabilityTransit Congestion and/or Reliability



2019 TIP Investment AnalysisAlameda County: Economic Vitality Projects


680

61

80

804

262

84

84

84

680

92

238

238

185

61

880

238

880

24

13

13

123

80

580

580

580

580

84

24

24

680

101

101

880

1281011011011041041288121521523333140555331321082199955801323333120991204129954889958510112810111111612812125051215223729580168068061801132208412293725156152152101101130680880878217859280358435353511182380280353511280101221121128128128292912126808080131371211161210110110111444424278080262848484680929223823818561880238880241313123808058058058058084241934529880236160881401085261018024680101101165080659999705113113516165329175101128132280171018801717992361115216016084599205

Oakland

Walnut Creek

Hayward

Berkeley

San Mateo

Pleasanton

Alameda

Union City

Redwood City

Livermore

San Leandro

Albany

Hillsborough

Dublin

Moraga

Foster City

Orinda

Tracy

San Ramon

Lafayette

East Palo Alto

Burlingame

Belmont

Emeryville

San Carlos

Piedmont

Danville

Newark

Fremont

25

25

25

25

2548

61

5555

55

55 5555

5555 55

55

5555

52

5252

8742

42

42

72

45

88

28

28

90

6262

91


Rehabilitation Project



2019 TIP Investment AnalysisAlameda County: Transportation System Effectiveness-Pavement and Bridge Condition Projects


2019 TIP Investment AnalysisContra Costa County Project List

1 AC Transit: San Pablo and Telegraph Ave Rapid Bus Upgrades 39 Contra Costa County: Kirker Pass Road NB Truck Climbing Lanes 2 Antioch: L Street Pathway to Transit 40 Contra Costa County: Kirker Pass Road Open Grade Overlay3 Antioch: Laurel Road Extension 41 Contra Costa County: Local Streets and Roads Preservation4 Antioch: Pavement Rehabilitation 42 Contra Costa County: Pacheco Blvd Sidewalk Gap Closure Phase 35 Antioch: Slatten Ranch Road Extension 43 Contra Costa County: Vasco Road Safety Improvements6 BART Car Exchange (Preventive Maintenance) 44 Danville: Camino Ramon Improvements7 BART Train Control Renovation 45 Danville: Diablo Road Imps. - Green Valley to Avenida Neuva8 BART Transbay Core Capacity Improvements 46 Danville: San Ramon Valley Blvd Lane Addition and Overlay 9 BART: Concord BART Station Modernization 47 El Cerrito Blvd: Carlson Blvd and Central Ave Pavement Rehab10 BART: Fare Collection Equipment 48 El Cerrito: El Cerrito del Norte Area TOD Complete Street Imps11 BART: Rail, Way and Structures Program 49 El Cerrito: Ohlone Greenway Station Area Bike/Ped Improvements12 BART: Railcar Procurement Program 50 Hercules: Sycamore/Willow Pavement Rehabilitation13 BART: Traction Power System Renovation 51 Lafayette: Pleasant Hill Rd Pavement Rehab & Maintenance14 BART:ADA Paratransit Capital Accessibility Improve 52 Martinez: Downtown Streets Rehabilitation 15 BATA: Toll Bridge Maintenance 53 Moraga: Moraga Way and Canyon/Camino Pablo Improvements16 BATA: Toll Bridge Rehabilitation Program 54 MTC: ALA/CC-80 and Bay Bridge Approach Express Lanes17 Brentwood: Brentwood Blvd Widening-(Phase I) North 55 MTC: Bike Share Capital Program (Richmond)18 Brentwood: Brentwood Blvd Widening Phase II 56 MTC: Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvements19 Brentwood: John Muir Parkway Extension: Phase II 57 Oakley: Civic Center Railroad Platform Park & Ride Complex20 Brentwood: Various Streets and Roads Preservation 58 Oakley: Street Repair and Resurfacing21 CCTA: I-680 Advanced Techologies 59 Orinda: Orinda Way Pavement Rehabilitation22 CCTA: I-680 Bus On Shoulder 60 Pinole: San Pablo Avenue Rehabilitation23 CCTA: I-680 SB HOV Lane Completion 61 Pittsburg: BART Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity24 CCTA: I-680/SR 4 Interchange Reconstruction-Phase 3 62 Pittsburg: Pavement Improvements25 CCTA: I-680/SR 4 Interchange Reconstruction-Phases I & II 63 Pleasant Hill: Road Improvements26 CCTA: Mokelumne Trail Bike/Ped Overcrossing 64 Richmond: Citywide Pavement Rehab ADA Improvement27 CCTA: Reconstruct I-80/San Pablo Dam Rd Interchange 65 Richmond: I-80/Central Avenue Interchange Modification28 CCTA: SR-4 Operational Improvements-Initial Phases 66 Richmond: Lincoln Elementary SRTS Pedestrian Enhancements29 Clayton: Neighborhood Street Rehab 67 San Pablo: Market Street Pavement Rehabilitation30 Concord: Commerce Ave Complete Streets 68 San Pablo: Rumrill Blvd Complete Streets Improvements31 Concord: Downtown Corridors Bike/Pedestrian Improvements 69 San Ramon: Alcosta Boulevard Pavement Rehab32 Concord: Monument Boulevard Class I Path 70 San Ramon: Crow Canyon Rd Widening (Alcosta to Indian Rice)33 Concord: Willow Pass Road Repaving and 6th St SRTS 71 San Ramon: Iron Horse Trail Bike and Pedestrian Overcrossing34 Concord: Ygnacio Valley Road Widening 72 Walnut Creek: BART TOD Access Improvements35 Contra Costa County: Bailey Road-SR-4 Interchange 73 Walnut Creek: N. Main St Rehab-I-680 to California36 Contra Costa County: Bailey Road Bike and Pedestrian Improvements 74 Walnut Creek: Ygancio Valley & Oak Grove Road Rehabilitation37 Contra Costa County: Camino Tassajara Realignment 75 WETA: Richmond Ferry Service38 Contra Costa County: Fred Jackson Way First/Last Mile Connection


2019 TIP Investment AnalysisContra Costa County Project List

NOT MAPPEDAC Transit: ADA Paratransit Assistance

AC Transit: Paratransit Van Replacement

AC Transit: Purchase (10) 24ft Cut-aways

AC Transit: Purchase (24) 60ft Artic Hybrid Buses

AC Transit: Replace (27) 40ft Urban Buses - Hybrid

AC Transit: Replace (6) 24ft Cut-Away Vans

CCCTA: County Connection ADA Paratransit Assistance

CCTA: SR 239 - New State Highway Study

Contra Costa County: West County Walk and Bike Leaders

EBRPD: Conta Costa Parks Bike/Ped Trail Improvements

ECCTA: Tri-Delta ADA Operating Assistance

MTC: Regional Planning Activities and PPM - Contra Costa County

San Ramon: San Ramon Valley Street Smarts

Walnut Creek: Parking Guidance System Pilot

WCCTA: WestCAT ADA Paratransit Operating Subsidy

WCCTA: WestCAT Purchase (6) Electronic Fareboxes

WCCTA: WestCAT Purchase (9) Electronic Fareboxes

WCCTA: WestCAT Purchase of (2) Radio Systems

WCCTA: WestCAT Replace (2) DAR MiniVans

WCCTA: WestCAT Replace (6) 2008 35ft Revenue Vehicles

WCCTA: WestCAT Replace (5) 35ft and (4) 40ft Vehicles


680

61

80

29

280

4

4

4

4

242

78080

185

61

24

13

13

123

80

80

580

580

580

24

24

680

Discovery Bay

Orinda

San Ramon

Port Costa

Dublin

Rodeo

PleasantHill

Brentwood

Danville

Alamo

San Pablo

OakleyMartinez

Moraga

Clayton

Pinole

EmeryvillePiedmont

Bay Point

Hercules

Blackhawk

Crockett

Bethel Island

Byron

Lafayette

El Sobrante

Albany

Kensington

El Cerrito

Benicia

Richmond

Vallejo

San Leandro

Antioch

Berkeley

Concord

Alameda

Pittsburg

Walnut Creek

Castro Valley

Oakland

San Francisco

48

26

71

27

42 35

24

6655

4353

53

31

2

36

49

68

38

61

6337

30

33 33

32

49



Safety Project




2019 TIP Investment AnalysisContra Costa County: Healthy and Safe Communities Projects


680

61

80

29

280

4

4

4

4

242

78080

185

61

24

13

13

123

80

80

580

580

580

24

24

680

Discovery Bay

Orinda

San Ramon

Port Costa

Dublin

Rodeo

PleasantHill

Brentwood

Danville

Alamo

San Pablo

OakleyMartinez

Moraga

Clayton

Pinole

EmeryvillePiedmont

Bay Point

Hercules

Blackhawk

Crockett

Bethel Island

Byron

Lafayette

El Sobrante

Albany

Kensington

El Cerrito

Benicia

Richmond

Vallejo

San Leandro

Antioch

Berkeley

Concord

Alameda

Pittsburg

Walnut Creek

Castro Valley

Oakland

San Francisco

48

65

27

25

55

34

18

21

12

12

22

3

5

17

28

70

1

23

75

56

8

8

54





2019 TIP Investment AnalysisContra Costa County: Economic Vitality Projects


680

61

80

29

280

4

4

4

4

242

78080

185

61

24

13

13

123

80

80

580

580

580

24

24

680

Discovery Bay

Orinda

San Ramon

Port Costa

Dublin

Rodeo

PleasantHill

Brentwood

Danville

Alamo

San Pablo

OakleyMartinez

Moraga

Clayton

Pinole

EmeryvillePiedmont

Bay Point

Hercules

Blackhawk

Crockett

Bethel Island

Byron

Lafayette

El Sobrante

Albany

Kensington

El Cerrito

Benicia

Richmond

Vallejo

San Leandro

Antioch

Berkeley

Concord

Alameda

Pittsburg

Walnut Creek

Castro Valley

Oakland

San Francisco

40

4

4

4

4

74

5860

45

51

64

64

64

64 64

64

5252

16

16

16

16

46

73

47

59

2020

2020

50

5 0

63

69

44

30

4141

41

67

33 33

62

62

29

29

29

29

29

29





2019 TIP Investment AnalysisContra Costa County: Transportation System Effectiveness-Pavement and Bridge Condition Projects


2019 TIP Investment AnalysisMarin County Project List

1 BATA: Toll Bridge Maintenance NOT MAPPED2 BATA: Toll Bridge Rehabilitation Program Caltrans: Marin County - TOS-Mobility3 Corte Madera: Central Marin Regional Pathway Gap Closure GGBHTD: Facilities Rehabilitation4 Corte Madera: Paradise Drive Multiuse Path GGBHTD: Ferry Propulsion Systems Replacement5 GGBHTD: Ferry Channel & Berth Dredging GGBHTD: Fixed Guideway Connectors6 GGBHTD: Golden Gate Bridge-Suicide Deterrent Safety Barrier GGBHTD: Purchase (7) Hybrid Buses7 GGBHTD: Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit, Phase 1-3A GGBHTD: Replace (14) 22' Gas Body-on-Chassis Vehicles8 GGBHTD: Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit, Phase 3B GGBHTD: Replace (2) Paratransit Vehicles 9 GGBHTD: Larkspur Ferry Terminal Parking Garage GGBHTD: Replace (67) Diesel Buses with Hybrid Buses10 GGBHTD: San Rafael Transit Center Relocation GGBHTD: Replace (7) 40' Diesel Buses11 Marin County: Hicks Valley/Marshall Petaluma/Wilson Hill Rd Rehab GGBHTD: Replace Paratransit Vehicles12 Marin County: Mountain View Rd Bridge Replacement GGBHTD: Transit Systems Enhancements13 MTC: Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvements MCTD: ADA Paratransit Assistance14 Novato: Carmel Open Space Acquisition MCTD: Preventive Maintenance15 Novato: Downtown SMART Station Commuter Lot MCTD: Relocate Transit Maintenance Facility16 Novato: Hill Recreation Area Improvements MCTD: Replace Articulated Vehicles17 Novato: Measure A Group 10 Pavement Rehabilitation MCTD: Replace Diesel Vehicles18 Novato: Novato Boulevard Widening, Diablo to Grant MCTD: Replace Shuttle Vehicles19 Novato: Vineyard Road Improvements MTC: Regional Planning Activities and PPM - Marin County20 NPS: Fort Baker's Vista Point Trail Novato: Downtown SMART Station Commuter Lot21 San Anselmo: Bike Spine TAM/SCTA: Bike Share Capital Program (SMART Corridor in Marin and

Sonoma Counties)

22 San Anselmo: Center Blvd Bridge Replace 23 San Anselmo: Sir Francis Drake Blvd Pavement Rehabilitation24 San Rafael: Francisco Blvd East Sidewalk Widening25 San Rafael: Francisco Blvd West Multi-Use Pathway26 San Rafael: Grand Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Improvements27 Sausalito: Bridgeway/US 101 Off Ramp Bicycle Imps28 SMART: Larkspur Extension29 TAM: North-South Greenway Gap Closure30 TAM: US 101 HOV Lanes-Marin-Sonoma Narrows (Marin)


1

580

1

680

80

29

37

221

29 12

12

680

80

131

37

121116

12

101

101

101

1

1

4

4

242

78080

24

13

13

123

80

80

580

24

24

Pleasant Hill

TiburonLafayette

San Anselmo

Emeryville

Albany

FairfaxMartinez

El Cerrito

Larkspur

Petaluma

Cotati

San Pablo

CorteMadera

Benicia

Moraga

Mill Valley

American Canyon

Piedmont

Orinda

Hercules

Sausalito

Novato

Ross

Pinole

Sonoma

Bolinas

Inverness

Port Costa

Stinson Beach

Dillon Beach

Boyes Hot Springs

Muir Beach

Crockett

Bodega Bay

Belvedere

El Sobrante

Santa Venetia

Kensington

Green Valley

Pacheco

Kentfield

Point Reyes Station

El Sobrante

Tomales

Rodeo

Berkeley

Napa

San Rafael

Fairfield

Richmond

Vallejo

Walnut Creek

27

2226

30

4

18

29 29

2425

21

20

19

23

3

16



Safety Project




2019 TIP Investment AnalysisMarin County: Healthy and Safe Communities Projects


1

580

1

680

80

29

37

221

29 12

12

680

80

131

37

121116

12

101

101

101

1

1

4

4

242

78080

24

13

13

123

80

80

580

24

24

Pleasant Hill

TiburonLafayette

San Anselmo

Emeryville

Albany

FairfaxMartinez

El Cerrito

Larkspur

Petaluma

Cotati

San Pablo

CorteMadera

Benicia

Moraga

Mill Valley

American Canyon

Piedmont

Orinda

Hercules

Sausalito

Novato

Ross

Pinole

Sonoma

Bolinas

Inverness

Port Costa

Stinson Beach

Dillon Beach

Boyes Hot Springs

Muir Beach

Crockett

Bodega Bay

Belvedere

El Sobrante

Santa Venetia

Kensington

Green Valley

Pacheco

Kentfield

Point Reyes Station

El Sobrante

Tomales

Rodeo

Berkeley

Napa

San Rafael

Fairfield

Richmond

Vallejo

Walnut Creek

30

78

2813





2019 TIP Investment AnalysisMarin County: Economic Vitality Projects


1

580

1

680

80

29

37

221

29 12

12

680

80

131

37

121116

12

101

101

101

1

1

4

4

242

78080

24

13

13

123

80

80

580

24

24

Pleasant Hill

TiburonLafayette

San Anselmo

Emeryville

Albany

FairfaxMartinez

El Cerrito

Larkspur

Petaluma

Cotati

San Pablo

CorteMadera

Benicia

Moraga

Mill Valley

American Canyon

Piedmont

Orinda

Hercules

Sausalito

Novato

Ross

Pinole

Sonoma

Bolinas

Inverness

Port Costa

Stinson Beach

Dillon Beach

Boyes Hot Springs

Muir Beach

Crockett

Bodega Bay

Belvedere

El Sobrante

Santa Venetia

Kensington

Green Valley

Pacheco

Kentfield

Point Reyes Station

El Sobrante

Tomales

Rodeo

Berkeley

Napa

San Rafael

Fairfield

Richmond

Vallejo

Walnut Creek

2

11 11

19

23

17





2019 TIP Investment AnalysisMarin County: Transportation System Effectiveness-Pavement and Bridge Condition Projects


2019 TIP Investment AnalysisNapa County Project List

1 American Canyon: Devlin Road and Vine Trail Extension NOT MAPPED2 American Canyon: Eucalyptus Drive Realignment Complete Streets MTC: Regional Planning Activities and PPM - Napa County3 American Canyon: Green Island Road Class I Napa County: 2014 Earthquake Pavement Repair4 Calistoga: SR-128 and Petrified Forest Intersection Improvements NVTA: Napa Vine ADA Operating Assistance5 Napa County: Airport Boulevard Rehabilitation NVTA: Napa Vine Equipment Replacement and Upgrades6 Napa County: Hardin Rd Bridge Replacement VVTA: Napa Vine Operating Assistance7 Napa County: Loma Vista Dr Bridge Replacement 8 Napa County: Silverado Trail Phase L Rehab9 Napa: California Boulevard Roundabouts10 Napa: Silverado Trail Five-Way Intersection Improvements11 Napa: SR 29 Bicycle & Pedestrian Undercrossing12 Napa: Vine Trail Gap Closure-Soscol Avenue Corridor13 NVTA: Napa Valley Vine Trail Calistoga-St. Helena Segment14 NVTA: SR 12/29/221 Soscol Junction Interchange Improvements15 NVTA: Vine Transit Bus Maintenance Facility16 St. Helena: Main Street Pedestrian Improvements17 Yountville: Hopper Creek Pedestrian Bridge and Path Project


12

29

68037

221

121

128128

128

29

29

12

12

68080

121116

12

101

16

29

Yountville

Green Valley

Calistoga

Petaluma

Sonoma

American Canyon

Angwin

Rohnert Park

St. Helena

Glen Ellen

Deer Park

Santa Rosa

Fairfield

Napa9

10

14

11

4

17

3

16

13

128



Safety Project




2019 TIP Investment AnalysisNapa County: Healthy and Safe Communities Projects


12

29

68037

221

121

128128

128

29

29

12

12

68080

121116

12

101

16

29

Yountville

Green Valley

Calistoga

Petaluma

Sonoma

American Canyon

Angwin

Rohnert Park

St. Helena

Glen Ellen

Deer Park

Santa Rosa

Fairfield

Napa 9 10

14

1

2


InvestmentAnalysis ALC RM AR edits 2019 TIP Investment Analysis Page 1 June 18, 2018 INTRODUCTION...

Documents

Transcript of InvestmentAnalysis ALC RM AR edits 2019 TIP Investment Analysis Page 1 June 18, 2018 INTRODUCTION...