TRANSIT
The Center for Neighborhood Technology
www.cnt.org
August 2003
This review will be more easily understood as annotated comments on problem areas in the 2030 RTP.* The 2030 RTP was considered from the point of view of public comment
during 2001 and 2002, particularly the comment found in
Changing Direction: Transportation Choices for 2030.**
Thematic issues that impact this section include:
·
Refusal to "flex" funds; persistent use of the old 60/40 highway/transit split, in spite of overwhelming public support for more transit and almost universal controversy on
major highway projects.
·
Failure to provide a dedicated revenue stream to transit service integration/coordination, which was universally desired in all types of public involvement processes.
·
Forces all modes using arterials to compete with the road interests for the $5 billion pot for "Strategic Recommendations," a competition destined to favor the road lobby
and to obscure the amount of funding used for other modes. Expanded and improved bus service needs to be given priority.
* Available at
http://www.sp2030.com/CommentSite/index.html
.
**Available at
http://www.cnt.org/tsp/trans/ctaqc/cc/theplan.htm
The chart below offers specific page references and quotes from the Regional Transportation Plan and commentary on why each quote is relevant or problematic
Page Quote
Comment
33
Proposals to improve the passenger level of service by
reconfiguring rail yards and stations as well as improving
rail access and operational performance were also
evaluated.
Transit coordination, which was a universal priority in all public
involvement processes, is rarely mentioned; no allocation is made
to accomplish transit coordination.
39
Committed projects include: Highway projects with
construction approval in the State's current 5-year
transportation program. Rail transit projects with FTA
New Start approval.
Earlier draft included "Service, management and operations
improvements that are approved and budgeted by the implementing
agency." Transit coordination might have been given higher priority
if this category was retained.
44
Transit oriented development (TOD) is in the Service
Intensive alternative
Decision about which strategies to include in which alternative
seems arbitrary. Strategies that are a priority, like TOD, paratransit
improvements, transit coordination or context sensitive design could
be built into all models.
55
In the case of auto access to transit, accessibility will also
change with prevailing highway congestion.
There is no discussion of existing inexpensive parking at transit
stations as a subsidy to a small number of individuals, as opposed
to expanded Pace bus access which could serve a larger number of
people. Transit-to-transit access would also leave land around
stations available to generate jobs and revenue for municipalities.
