Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISties, health care facilities, sports venues, national/international airports, recreational destinationsand shopping attractions in the San Francisco Bay Area.As of 2000, more than 233,000 residents of Monterey County and southern Santa Cruz Countylived within 4.5 miles of one of the three Caltrain Extension Alternative commuter rail stations.Based on the findings of the 2000 census, more than 50 percent of the population served is likelyto be of Hispanic/Latino background and nearly 50 percent of the population served is classifiedas being of low or moderate income. The average wage of all private workers in Santa ClaraCounty is nearly twice the average wage in Monterey County; while the average wage of hightech workers in Santa Clara County is nearly three and one-half times the average wage paid byMonterey County employers. Both the Caltrain Extension and Express Bus alternatives willprovide travel time competitive, affordable transit access to these higher paying jobs.4. Will the proposed fixed guideway investment generate economic benefits for MontereyCounty?Population and housing growth is forecast for the communities and neighborhoods surroundingthe proposed fixed guideway stations. Both the Caltrain Extension and Express Bus alternativescould help to accommodate this growth by providing efficient public transportation options.Beneficial impacts to community cohesion and quality of life would also occur for residents andbusinesses near the proposed rail stations or park-and-ride facilities. Residential property valuesare expected to increase slightly near transit stations. Higher density housing and mixed usedevelopments would most likely occur near rail stations, which could provide additional affordablehousing units to the communities. (See the response to question number 5 for more on transitorienteddevelopment.)Employment growth at the proposed station sites would result mostly from a redistribution ofexisting employment. Access to regional jobs and educational and entertainment opportunitieswould increase for residents living near proposed stations, including environmental justicepopulations. As noted above, the proposed project will provide access to higher paying jobs inSanta Clara County/Silicon Valley, as well as jobs in San Mateo and San Francisco counties.Currently, there is no reasonably priced public transportation between Monterey County and theSan Francisco Bay Area. In addition to jobs, educational opportunities which provide entry levelaccess to these higher paying jobs will be accessible by the proposed Caltrain Extension andExpress Bus alternatives.Higher wages earned by Monterey County residents working in the San Francisco Bay Area willlikely create secondary employment opportunities located within the Monterey Bay region.5. Will the proposed transit centers promote localized transit-oriented development?The Transportation Agency for Monterey County has adopted a set of guidelines for communitydevelopment that encourage the siting of higher density housing and mixed-use developmentsaround transit centers. Higher density housing near rail stations could provide additionalaffordable or workforce housing. The Agency will partner with jurisdictions to promote transitorienteddevelopment around transit centers. The Transportation Agency also administers theTransportation for Livable Communities Transit-Oriented Development incentive grant program,which rewards jurisdictions who approve such developments with funds for transportationprojects. Encouraging this kind of growth around transit maximizes the investment in thetransportation networks by promoting transit use and infill development in walkable areas, therebyincreasing living and transportation choices while reducing reliance on automobiles.parsons CHAPTER 9: SUMMARY 227
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISGeneral and local community plans show higher density housing and mixed-use developments inproximity to the three proposed rail stations. The draft Castroville Community Plan proposeshousing and mixed-use developments proximate to the rail station. The City of Salinas’ GeneralPlan and Downtown Rebound Plan both call for redevelopment around the intermodaltransportation center. In Pajaro, the County Redevelopment and Housing office is planning for ajob-training center next to the rail station. All three plans actively support the transit centers asfocal points for redevelopment and infill development.6. Is funding available to implement the proposed transit service?Table 9-7 lists the proposed capital budget for the Caltrain Extension to Monterey County project.The total estimated project cost is $99.5 million expressed in year-of-expenditure dollars, dividedas $10.4 million for the Salinas MST bus facility and $89.0 million for the rail project, including alayover facility, bus transfer center and commuter parking in Salinas, a platform and parking inCastroville, a platform and parking in Pajaro, and main line UPRR track upgrades in Gilroy andbetween Gilroy and Salinas. This budget amount does not include an allowance for the purchaseof Caltrain rolling stock as sufficient passenger capacity exists to implement both the two-trainand four-train scenarios without need for additional passenger coaches.Funding for the Caltrain Extension project includes the State Traffic Congestion Relief Program,the Proposition 116 rail bond funds, State Transportation Improvement Program–Public TransportationAccount funds, Regional Surface Transportation Program-Interest, a federal earmark,Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement funding, and contributions from local partneragencies. A proposed application for Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding in theamount of $45 million fills the gap between the available funding and the estimated total projectcost. These fund sources and amounts are preliminary and are subject to change.Three sources of funds required to meet net public operating costs (i.e., subsidize transitoperations and maintenance expense), are anticipated: local transportation funds, state transitassistance funds, and local sales tax funds. 16Table 9-7Caltrain Extension to Monterey County Capital Budget—Funding Element(year of expenditure dollars)Funding SourcesIdentified FundsAvailable Secured Proposed Grand TotalRegional Surface Transportation Program–Interest $ 315,000 $ 315,000 $ 0 $ 315,000Federal earmark $ 990,644 $ 990,644 $ 0 $ 990,644Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement $ 975,000 $ 975,000 $ 0 $ 975,000Proposition 116 rail bond funds $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 0 $ 3,000,000State Transportation Improvement Program $ 4,520,000 $ 4,520,000 $ 0 $ 4,520,000Traffic Congestion Relief Program $ 20,000,000 $20,000,000 $ 0 $ 20,000,000Local contributions $ 16,865,000 $ 1,165,000 $15,700,000 $ 16,865,000Monterey–Salinas Transit Federal grant/local match $ 9,411,000 $ 0 $ 9,411,000 $ 9,411,000Federal New Starts $ 45,000,200 $ 0 $45,000,200 $ 45,000,200Total Revenues $101,076,844 $30,965,644 $70,111,200 $101,076,844Source: TAMC—subject to change16A local transportation sales tax is proposed as a November 2008 ballot initiative.parsons CHAPTER 9: SUMMARY 228
Page 4 and 5:
DRAFTCALTRAIN EXTENSIONTO MONTEREY
Page 6 and 7:
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211: CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
show all

Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?