Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03162004 - C.13 TO: Board of Supervisors Contra FROMY =: �`':. :• Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee -''- Costa (Supervisor Millie Greenberg, Chair) County DATE: March 16, 2004 SUBJECT: Richmond Community-Based Transportation Plan SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS SUPPORT the Richmond Community-Based Transportation Plan as recommended by the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee; and AUTHORIZE the Chair of the e Board to sign a letter to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission indicating the Board S support and requesting similar planning be performed for Rodeo. FISCAL IMPACT The plan has no fiscal impact on the County. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Neighborhood House of North Richmond recently completed the Richmond Community- as ,Bed Transportation Plan, intended to provide short-term and long-term solutions for transportation needs identified by residents and community organizations in Richmond. The plan covers the unincorporated area of North Richmond. Participants included staff of the County's Employment and Human Services Department and the Community Development Department. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X -YES RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER Of 001,11;i& millo-O." SIGNATURE(S): _Supervisor Millie Greenberg_ Supe isor Gayle B. Uilkema ACTION OF BOARD ON march 16., 2004 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS ATR UE x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT Nme AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: John Greitzer/ X9251335-1201} ATTESTED march 16, 2004 cc: Community Development Department (CDD) JOHN SWEETEN, CLERK OF Therese Knudsen, MTC Gail Murray, Nelson\Nygaard THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY EPUTY GATransportation\TWic\Board Orders120041march 8 richmond plan.doc f RICHMOND COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLAN MARCH 8, 2004 Page 2 BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (Continued) MTC and Neighborhood House seek local support for the plan both from governmental and non-governmental organizations. They have asked for such support from the Board of Supervisors. In response, the Board on February 24 referred the plan to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee for review and recommendations. The Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee on March 8 reviewed the plan and recommends the Board of Supervisors express its support for the plan as requested by MTC. Implementation of this plan would not have any fiscal impact on the County. Other agencies would be the lead parties for implementing the strategies that are recommended in the plan. The planning process took place from April through December 2003, and was one of five MTC pilot planning programs in low-income communities around the Bay Area. The plan that resulted was based on a community survey in which local residents and organizations were asked to identify their most important transportation needs. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates performed the survey for MTC. Relationship to the County's Welfare-to-Work Action Plan The Board of Supervisors in 1999 adopted the County's Welfare-to-Work Transportation Action Plan. There are many similarities between recommendations in that plan and those in the Richmond Community-Based Transportation Plan. Most of the solutions proposed by both plans fall into the same categories. For example, the bus shelters, bus-stop seats, bikeways and safe routes to school proposed in the Richmond plan would all fall under the County plan's strategy to "Develop Process for Ensuring Safe Access to Transit". The only two exceptions are the strategies in the Richmond plan that focus primarily on seniors: the Older Driver Safety and Mobility Workshop, and a Trip Reimbursement Program, in which volunteer drivers would be reimbursed on a per-mile basis for driving eligible persons in need. There are no strategies similar to these in the County's Welfare- to-Work Transportation Action Plan. However, strategies to improve transportation for seniors are being considered by the Advisory Council on Aging's Transportation Working Group. Staff has not identified any aspects of the Richmond plan that conflict with the Welfare-to-Work Action Plan. The Richmond plan would provide additional elements not covered by the County plan and would respond to community needs. In addition to expressing support for the Richmond Community-Based Transportation Plan, the Transportation Water and Infrastructure Committee also recommends the Board request that Rodeo be placed in consideration at MTC for any similar planning efforts in the future. The Committee indicated that Rodeo, like North Richmond, is a community where lower-income residents have difficulty traveling to job locations in large part because of transportation limitations. Exhibit A is a draft letter from the Board of Supervisors to MTC, expressing support for the plan and making the request for similar planning efforts for Rodeo if MTC is to perform such planning again in the future. Exhibit B is the executive summary from the Richmond Community-Based Transportation Plan. Full copies of the entire plan were provided to the Board along with MTC's request for support on February 24. The executive summary is provided to the Board again here for reference. EXHIBIT A The Board of Supervisors John Sweeten County Administration Building Clerk of the Board 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Costa and Martinez,California 94553-1293 County Administrator ounty (925)335-1900 John Gioia,1st District Gayle B.Uilkema 2nd District Millie Greenberg,3rd District Mark DeSaulnier,4th District2-7 Federal D.Glover,5th District01. � L March 16, 2004 . DRAFT The Honorable Steve Kinsey Chair, Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland CA 94607 Dear Chair Kinsey: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on March 16 expressed its support for the Richniond Community-Based Transportation Plan recently completed by MTC and Neighborhood House of North Richmond. The plan sets forth promising short-term and long-tern strategies that directly address the transportation needs expressed by Richmond and North Richmond residents during the planning process. The plan is consistent with Contra Costa County's Wel fare-to-Work Transportation Action Plan . These two plans complement each other and provide the framework for implementation of effective neighborhood-based services,providing that adequate funding is obtained. The Board of Supervisors appreciates the opportunity to review the MTC plan. we also ask that MTC consider the Rodeo community for similar planning if another round of this type of transportation plan is developed in the future. Our staff will communicate this request to MTC staff in more detail. Like North Richmond, the unincorporated community of Rodeo is home to numerous lower-income residents who have difficulty traveling to job centers due in large part to transportation limitations. The Board believes the Rodeo community could benefit greatly from a similar planning effort. Thank you for MTC's efforts to help improve transportation services in the North Richmond community. Sincerely, Federal D. Glover Chair, Board of Supervisors EXHIBIT B Jf•'sy _x��yy Af. i`•r`� riJ t ��'•sem „t,4: ... .._ _ - METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Kich ond ,«,•..'7'"7'+i its •.rr•wLe1'tS a�i' Wlfi.'�"'�"`''"£ ti'+ ,• -.,.a..Y.... .•-r"- moi•'7«'i��-1'r�t+a{x"'�`Rritry'1.}r.!`71,., .� `c�{' l{c�i)f �[�! Co uniNty. a ed +Jl.. .r+•tiJR•'M.s n1» 1��;f.IF+1l'ri ... 1. 's al fit P :.'1f.•1". W3�w.Rr 1'XT ' „tom.;i. �"-E..•�+!''�fF fsC� ,++ . ranspo a ion ...'r,... S hJ y.LW/�u rf t� •S o�K YVw Plan e Rit�• .mow ,r'#,•i err i fttt'L[...�.'6•�.*S++-t'fC°/.w.�}' '��,- .- :'iL x"Xj t'ti f�+!.tl:iS'..7�+lL.s.:a• � a� l tr q.CaSry R[,fF'R.t*".-.-�e.l•.uY�v !•`Sa..- 73.tm. - : rsrtia'tY1t'ra tf tM 'fid ,•r ,'� � z`. r�P1 a .} `�'h�{• -t -�•'''+w�`+it..;y r _. .t.ciuwrn. .,•r-}4^lt!$'f . sem- t 1 �;- E�t '.. ,F '«►t «"? =,'"''4:'+rfi'� `=�'l,,i"t i.. �Y` ti +11 _.. y...,.•r;,ln'tr ;"c.'.S e.SP-�"w`[ f.-+rs.s i"'�'t,s•.tt• r.iT�3y�•i£..R'�"� ."3.i' tri f. ``.:_s 3+3n_ ,9 y t'.!'�.tl...+aa�.d t:,.�Yd'•wNS GSf . x Y ,y +i R• t ry Ri1'' ��' •.ar rt S- ck w ..'' .. M+ _ December 2003 He/son I Nygaar consulting associates 833 Market Street,Suite 900,San Francisco,CA 94103 415.28.4.1544 Phone 415-2841554 FAX OF F+ORTH RICHMOND Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary M E:TR 0p0L |TAn 1' R4mSp0 RTAT / 0W comM| S S |nw ' Table � Contents��u PAGE ExecutiveSummary ~...~.~.~.~.~.0.~...~. ~.Osseo.~ .~.~.~.~.~.....~..see U Background ^~'.^~~.~'..~'*as assesses son as as.,~,,,~,,~~,~.~,Osseo so,~^,,~,,,~,~,~so,~^~,~.~,~,~,.,^.,as same~_,,,,,,_~~ ] Richi�� -~~'~--''-~'---'~-~~--~-'~^~'~'~'~~'~^~'^~'-^-------'~ 3 - ' Community Outreach Methods And Findings ............................................................... 5 Potential Solutions And Their Feasibility,~'~.'~_'~'~-_e A.*Samoa-~- VOODOO~ 8 Recommendations.,,_.__.~~.,,,~_,,~,~_~~,,,,,~,,_~~,_,~,~,~,~,~^~,,_~, -.ease eases~-Osseo* 13 Funding.~,_,_~_~________~~_________~_~__`~_~.~_~__~_~_~__,,_~_~,~_~_____~~_____~-_ 15 Implementation ................................... .^~^~~'~^~^same`^~^^^~^~'~^~^^~^^~^-^~^^'~^`season ^~^~^~^~^^^^``^^^ 20 Table of Figures ' PAGE Figure ES-1 Richmond-Area Community-Based Transportation Planning Communities~^~~ 2 Figure ES-2 Lack of\/ehiCU|8r Availability`.~~_-ea~_~mass__~,.,~_~.,_,_~,~_~,~,~,,_~_~_~_~_~_eon._~_~.~'~so 4 Figure ES-3 Summary: Evaluation of Proposed So\UHons.~—'~''~.~.~~~^~.'~~'~~'~..~'~...~- 12 Figure ES-4 Potential Funding Socrces_-'''__-.-'----'--'~~.''''-_-^---'''- 19 / ' Page Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary R q. ,... ..... .... 1 R A W IS`%P 0 R TA T I C N '(A' 0 M M I S 5 10 N 11fall. E_T 0 P 0 L I T A Executivek' Summar Background Creation of the Richmond-Area Community-based Transportation Plan was a resident-driven process to identify strategies that will close the transportation gaps in their 'neighborhoods. In April 2003, the Metropolitan Transportation Commiss.ion (MTC) contracted with Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associatproject p Neighborhood es and its ' House of North Richmond, for the.first of five pilot transportation planning programs in low-income Bay Area communities. Nelson\Nygaard managed the overall project, while Neighborhood House led the-community outreach. The planning effort took place between April and December 2003. -It was designed to build upon the findings of MTC's 2001 Lifeline Transportation Network Report, which outlined a safety net of transit routes for low-income people. The target area for this Plan includes -the neighborhoods of North Richmond, the Iron Triangle, Coronado, Santa Fe, Old Town San Pablo and Parchester Village. This area has the greatest density of residents in poverty in Contra Costa County, as shown on maps in both the Lifeline Report and the 2001 Environmental Justice Report. Figure ES-1 is a map of the project area. Page 1 . NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary Figure ES-1 Richmond-Area Communit -Based Transportation' Planning Communities Parchester r s. Millage r told Town San Pabloi�y 3 ��,. :�< � yr�.Cy� � MIN ?�h�y,�4k'S , {<,r•r• {t.�,'-.<;x?^�" <r'�n r :�*:' E,`�KS �•u•tel{ ;tu ,a:x�'jK . .... •„,• ...:..::y{,rs'Y:..i:. «.,..aw.,r ;;rt.,;y?.L p rk<••+k• v�..,�<��"r,S r�#s,''t'•.•�jC e'bv`••a t•:r!'d+. :.> :r4.•ta.`'S'#z:.`'3''`,<':'d`LY.}:f?Y'"'.-'3'r'"'r`ri ,.v'kn `�;+:k, yr,�'t> .,,Mr. tib".M!-.t"",r}„>t r'E2!"«"�tiLC,:f.' r•C%'i'v:.•�a! ''•>;xr 'Y x .o-h` Y L k �'� . fie S:. r�4Ye,'fYc.=VC` G'r:•?,< +,., k�Yy�•"i'!:`:��„�t.': ,��•x ✓y::ts- ?: :i$C•t`�P r. ��1,.^2+�}..-• iG a' �• .•..h' •'r� t rk `.?";:4p r':ro5•=:xXµ' .'�nw�«.•,tar.. :,;;: .?:• }� .}�t.�•...: b:^' t: n.�� xi,;Y:n:,�C •� .fit ..fitti+•S.:;s2SC:Y,F'qs. .•,,�{ r �. �£...... r{+�, ,f y••:+e4., q; '�•'-��''''n.- i+4,;;%fi. ',�.x:C'•+t+•'='' :t:• l i:i;EY w aP{'pµ2 s.: Richmond w�� "N o i�t'"�i�''y $:^ .; 'F.„4 �",� •fM ""� !\/V�!��L7�1� +• 5,,, 2.+• .'-'�r,`.c.r,"�4�7'r s q" •"a^u;^::'r' ' .,.' v'•;,+�(II .:tib R•yY+_�• ,{Jyf^. 3•. [ r •�!{� .C't,'+�,r .�;%aqa ,.lk'•%�,y�av;�,' '.:"'y a%', J rM 2. +..<-a°•af'S.z,. -.:$}'"�}�., fL"y'•,'in`'r''i'l ''`=*5: t +'3C '^,+• i:.•«'••,,+:'`:nh $t`•:;t"y'c'"""'a?'�; r�}•} •r• .t'i..yr•�,� ��s�'�{,�i.;:,i::�••'+�`•.•• �ai'r s,,. rr.C�'2u;t,, 'S {;'t;.: :; .n.Y"'r`«;:ti:!`•�:,Sf„e', .by# •f#"•;f3r''{'b s'{.r•;, m;'k> {};}¢"..fr<^:{;--'�'.' .F g+,� <`,'la:rC v. ,...,e;• 5,��9^��hy'.. ;� }. ;.2,h>..,, "+�,. •" nY C�t ,,�.•i �: :r3,w^'ri'!�N''�:�,'ti'i.St: a, ,•.t"}:� '< i ..Y' Y .,,%[ rvfi '�"+#.`?•�<.''x'�w'r.'•.• •Y',���.,,tr� 'ta,;::v, +�.�.I&'.,,� L.St: r�a✓k w^.=.:, .� �^8.s 5.' a��Y :. F f:. ':M.�.s�XaYr+�<�r {"%�#�k ss,��+•c ..Y 2..,43}•:J;4.+:<' � :.;:�' �. :•`b•X �}M 2�? j���i ytr�Jv.; r 'r�S•,2+..•'}r �.. ' '+"r'M1 <{j;,: C` 5y�-,N'�r++<',,.}.4'�,c.' •i ?Cj;.ry• vti}:•'':Y:}b t, �..,w^.,•>-Cy,•{•<t:n,S:ni%,. •++ �: 71'-`- 64: V ;2H'X4 r y'+,g.: •E 4 •'.r'�.•,<g'yam•,;rY.Z� `J}:,. :v'+r�r�xi3:iS•Y3.'r y V'r �:, fi6Y ? :{.a;%Y Sr`4 r .,=t�'wz}. �r ,:?i�.;i7 .S,L•YS", 5 t. t� :. .p. 'q`i•.':,•:4�. ~+�' :•.•.h'S''rnS. .,Wr..' tE;"�.2'•+r} Y'' '.'r'.•q 'k;'"'K,.^. .YrY <y.: •. _ , �w■� {r�:,:t..f k{�a'T��r ','`��dr*.'lSr2.;•: 4I >g'Siv'3 t{, ••• { •'�;��.."ytyRyyE •.ap#,�r,s 'i s�'':. .'.S .•,s • x. {1. '' 'Y'S,^ Y.2� ,{ ::r,!',Y Rh }"' +•.{$"tYi...•4 vY.' {,•p'.' :{.M. w+5:%•3g1'Y. �■Y�■} , Y,. Y if:`vr' t°Y :{:{w 's• ,+ {;d a Y}• a +x••�:�,Y•a;:r:.ti:. .� :yS;w,S. rn�J'Er•S*�'" {ri:.. /• �, .".v"Sf•'F.F 'ri iz: Yv. '{- :p. �. ..i:S•'::Xr )�".:.' .YS 3`j 2.yz£• ••;YS +,{;?.. •:z n.�d: r:.Q. 5 Santa F X. •�s��' .ti. �• .�oaaff f fi,rr �+ .l.,,:,.✓... �•. �pv. .s ni: s.. , ,.}.^!,v ?:. q .:tt" -.:t «v+f w.t.- :{r v<M•":'A ...J• r:J FX. v$.» y f t! :Aar K ........... � =r' •k _::,�, .<t✓"�:2�A..:,..,..:: °'.Y>#ua'.,' r fir¢ •.�.. •w�. z: s. icr:�• ''�•�« „•ti�'nv.t}+ •� 2,W �r3: '7 E'�'r.�4i:t•�'+�'S ,�•,,�� :n�f. >�`.ap ws.,:���''•..r:.:Yr •�` i2i!<Sr.t',W.•,,,. r'i 'i+ct•Y•Y,>: ?•'S.'h.;{.��,<,,"• ..4:3 .li{. ,.•:$2s^ :r,Y{ •Y ✓i .} , :{. •ry d;X,Ys,.,'�ix•,Y:3• .,-.a" f- 3 ?:;F~: i ''`;; rn,r• .n'v'„ }.•'. �;.,`i;�:?;•:,.,Lf:}.rl•'.•''5:,...:. `.i,{}ro, ..;�. i i tS Y {• .{ t •y5 Y �::{>^...K.Jn,�'+`��5 s a:.<yF. {;3,N.1 :x '�`=,.•.K•1. i`:t �..•}.;$.r.{ri'k e } ,},,,y ,- Y'° � Z',AW,t!;;,`, s}; :»u: {nv ��Y.•' ,;,�'?' "•:.,'.�vF ..6:' ,,�4.: :'7�r�. •.,W+Y.. #S1 } •� i?V:• Y G" M'?N.:•::, ���. L::k!�Y. fifq:,• e<y'�.. 2+'«;;{;<'"E•. ��. + iY.,•,�^" �,{ kr:Y '>•. YYXS:S-•. « g:• Y SS?%.,.:! ••_:^-<rrx•} ^,'r�',.` t o d+ I, ,Li��,.!a•t' r C , ::{"L�.�v,. 1•,a•.:✓:{f, .'�`{'r,. i� '•:�t:".w•j��!/�J'„4va�;;,w.} �•�n«.-, ••Y't d•+�i" dS'+',k:•YC .4•rr Y• "4?uf.:t}• t�, YG•�y ,�iY;a,••tY••.w� ,fi, :?r" f� 'rte Y�3���.�';:l ">•�'.v 4s•:Y. 'Y. rJEt`.'S't`�wi' Coronado o V ad� 19CmA ,{• :i•+7"f :,+R.:<:f..• ,{ :r.. !•Yr,•h{1Y tri:. } S+'T•". {•.,ar•.i•:,.4: ■M/r n ,..;:•/ 4 ,5,<,�{''. . b?Lr.k k.+ :a t }4:•<�. `} � _.., F.r 2.' '%':n :•}:: �n.{Yf'.' � t' +v:':'{'' S: d}.wt}:,r3},«w•«,+{.;,E i✓��E;i,',? ,y w t�.. ar„y.,�'. ''fii.. ,, ',,'}.w ♦3,..vu�,3'�d$r „�l •5=:�'{:, t;•,k°+c',� 3,ri; },rt•X.,.>:�•'.. .�: •�`,�,-`3,:.,.., �.•: �-;,«N .Jv': +g r.a•• '''�C^. t �•{':. :}#:F,^:}yx•;.::.v,:S^,;:nfiY'•:tr..{,.i;.^t}ttrnt,p:..ti,:.:�o-'•+}asr.r✓•„4k„�.,.»,,.k:..,.rh�y•?+'t++:.t�rzt:2�..•�.•i:::''•,"}b.'.:?i,i,.r✓,\�i.•�.''-.,:tr:'rg'yz'•'.,>n#1 L••.i..1.+:•i:�.:ti..'•.�.,t,i'�+r":,..{i^$x,�AY.��+},,.•'�;••L'•.c,`r•+.'y{r<'tb.r.:}.,.'«v!LL^:'.,ifi';;..i`.Y'�"v."-.�.r;?.,�q,{yyE.-,?„•n,:•:,.,:x:z.;a9{•:r,i+.`{,5R}:::r1.}::tC.a:::,?,,?.-:n:<v:.Ki.,aSr•<iy•'T•.rr'<•:.`'kr.:.S•'X:,•{.k�x?•t,n.'•`a�..t,'r•:•.:r.?3,"•YfcfS,3>,,2•.:S.'''.<..•.•:,'.:r4•s•v.ry.^firi.!t.••.r,>':};93.y..c}.v„,t.r..ar•Jr-iY'$s.�d:,'r•--w.wt-,a,�•:�- " '.11M •. ,::.}'t Y}4••�.�...:}^t'•'¢•".,'nrn�.Y:'+�}•.'♦•`„!.,,•_;re.k.y"v'.';y:.�^5.w.i!...�"`'...._,,,x.'i.a;..X:/r:.t,u.r�.}.,{'-,..,ti"d•..{;'.•.;<•.,},n'.',.ra'R••'.s..,•.t S'`,«^:��ppd?.WON :✓nv'.qqyt` `•t•?�'?.•¢n«^t•:ii,.aS..:�rCfn:+fi2:sx'.2...«.:*..`},k a,x'•::t•:r:.i,£i,�*,,.'.r.•'$,,tYS•.t«..;:'z>l�'•.^.l"t:'Ct':,rY.a .,W<�"1,,t-Sti{�.S:,^}Si,4.`,^.1.4:+..1,:•':S.S�.rs..,a,YZ?i{X.•S,'i'u',k$'"g�^rn.::.,�",�'Y,<•µ•r..M1<.�...n}<.:'n,«:ix'};C,i�3•....••%�\'.`.'�=t,"•:•:.t:t..•dtr:fix2,:}:'2,"'al',,.'^'5Y+i,S•fit�..a; �:•.a..;:y.�r'.Y"'.�::x'2v"i•'2�,mt.,'4d,:virtyY•�,.f£.r3- ..,,5,.�,'�.i.k.:a;..•!t+i<'��::'v••..>.„`,�.};5 i�,vw,:A'��{S•,+'',-;.:«.v:,".s�.^"¢'"$^`,�.'vr'v.'!.',r#h�.'.'•"t,`::_,p Y,''�•_ix,�4ts,.�.•'i':.i'"•�'+.'r.;�.:.ik..•''..+ra'.,y.h:.:+a'i_�ti�:b.,t.,7!y�-.=..r�rF'<dn«5'4:s�xr.f*�w:.-�,!,tl..•ti•�Y3•R.!•dti<. •'rx"•',r✓...:<trv •.t .''°"','�i:-' '.}`.$•,•aK4i•;r,+u'".•!'•. •.:.:XE ' :•,v^r •l a4+.<'�.�Y,`y�,ri.',Y,�..q+{^-`y}'.:; r$.;.'..,,• Y rR h ::•:;EcG' .i.3:v�y ,a,:.•'t�'trz•.: \.Vii..• ..,.�,., az. ,.,3<!.:;oi r1i• ,.:..,-at:•F„a. S`3%: ,":,^::,:«••-� .R..,:_"4.''�... •.',`v.�a,,..a+�"'�`}d'e .'"�",`r'•:'r. �-,•y�",,•",:.. ..}.�.r'i•,.:'s.:• :yv,. .^1.7'' •v''r„ ����.r/'•".i,''::° '^.,L i}^,{�'!•rites 't''v:w4��•n �,i�•}'`,,.tn.,,".v ;'Yr •.�. :;ti;;Y,'S%',�'.•.'+r��•.��r„. K ':;..�''• y��'S' ,fh, ,7S.,,a,Y, f,v .%'.a'"?V�t,.$ ^{2 :ay„'• .l•.a ..n4,. W M1"• �S} r•:�:. v:W'•yrww;.'Lr� if^:+$ ?:•r�^f �.{ ; �{•. tt,<„ e l!rge:' r.•k, •.vr„<7�atSC.S#':i7.`..•:d, {>v Y,. "'2 '�''�F: },:<, w,n,� tv ri.,:¢: .P',a �.C, W.,t t"� `:Ytr Y:.<,' Y::.,'22+'{;:i, .,.,r• 4^: ,�"`, iY!�. :"fC ..La .>�. a ��u1I.h.• :x Y t v r} p ,:. '•,f't. •.a•:ta� ':�.• pis.& •:-�. .. .. ..: .:.,..M..e. :. , .:.v. .... :::,:{{u{?'•:{:.S. 4• vr$ .4vi`.,: .@•:<r t5• ,�Y .,,r..«.,{ .. ., ......?a.,}<....✓...+,.,,R.. ., ...+..3.+,} !<•{..5.....a...,.i:. x.....:.r...�n:5:33, ':k.....: ,3� i. .Sr`•``i+ ..,T'•,'?'« "s' y`�,r ,:".^..•A;..a Ia., ,Sd�;.. 'n.. p. vy<,"p}•F:■"'.� 'S,'' S .{ arwt`YS,:CtF..7r .J,�.•.,,�.,., ,.�, ,h.f yy�"„-w}.« •R.•.}..,v,�+ ":$},} •i .F ..<:ry ,.i' '.,2N' .:,•�' {A b a.i6r.. Y.': 'JY +.{ -s,YC'. X{{•.,.4M-x 5 -. v X :. :rrr :t+'lr.:+, i,' �r }- '457...,n�v• :+"•S`.^tii.f..};:.:•.�;�:..a.�tqt}rn,'.:f:yy>�':�r'_ �S:t:G.•.G}�. .�v.:.�M'.-�'{,,�'2•+j^v^:�',Yf,�'.`k ,$} f 1 .,'@� }M.�}r Iron Triangle .��X•,Y�:,•+2�' {.v '101 , RNWAIJ 4-*- :- "'7ra :Y.95,• '.'!�,ria.C�•'P k ro : sa � •r. :Sam ,� L $ ' �x• , .T •E � g•y i:'r+",.•:4.r.'Y.:Y G4r: • .k n .p• •,2:i: }{, Y �'" $+..,�..ah .:4.••i ,' t `CNV�•A t{:� X e,,,{ .'•iH }..•'•i u,�.,l �:Fy {. Yt g rd-.. •a. r a a'f 'zi�ev X wx•4�,' Ybxp'. �. .4t•r r .4� k ^3: 4..2•-i r.'.S••. r.h :Y rX4za gyp. .•S. r a •:}:n•:K � rr;; .::•.:.v,:. r .v,?.....,. '.wr ..r',«..,..?7S?itii.'L`A:,. s;;: .} ^tW d. ',... S:+w..^ -. ...}1K•Y: .... ..,:: .••K{Y3.' .« ..i :'. a wY.r..:.a•Y..•. ...... `•:.: ; :. •.': .:�a MN vhe: +:�. ...3k., t.:•....; ..?{,. •ter:: r �' .:,. sy:. n::r:•}:• .,#.. -:.:fir .r.. ..,:..: ::,:....::t':t•4a:...... 's': :,,,..:,.::....:: ..,:' .:.,Ort »tt•,«.:tS»,a •'.'a".�•,•r.•.,4��'��2}.�-•-:?•,. ..i"t'sY: t •nh•{ Sw,,ch.•, ,s..^.,r='"r..�.:"'' R;Y�'w:; ?.Nn`•.Y.••*'v +{. ::t'..'•f4. .,eta.:• :.:.xvn.r ,•.'•Yes•.•'t�.?� .r. r:•i., p� v::4:eaf` :;:�. �.. .:.wtrst^ �f�;:.r,-..: k• .f.•:::f:. +,Y., n\....,tti•''1t::+rA't" .t-+r :,,.y:2+ x< •{;3s::'•. ri'v; .:yv .2'-X;r :..t!:paM:'y'-\X. •:.t'" ''"'�� `!. .<;�: µ,Zy„ Y. a:?r}'Y�.ry+}q�., ,�j•�+ l{ ,,.,{n<y"•'••::.<tt,'#:,L w:6:::' Y:Y"i't.= �� -i}U ,},t:.. yM�S�`�• :,'fi,•'�"'y"(YW.t'j •{^'.,�pY'"""i•'r � V��� .+a;a„'� �` e,.=, .�• ..'�,iw~'�Y \. r"T�,•i;'•,.'>�.,.,kb{ r.,b, •.�,`.T`.:r. } Legend '. { „na�'t `�'c.� rr5 a,1E�xr 7:rg: •4..r 2 , "}" _ Y .<. it•:`'}.y;•�: ,-t;;r^3+�•a�`✓,{. ^c. .k#'" �.,q:a .3t'�% 4^�:,. nes, ^wx.'^Z•qS�� ,d : a. gtti''{: sr#:•;»,a'aM1•-Y,' etr ' fi >: 3'.•',n'..'{. ?�,�r ��;t,. Incorporated Municipalities ;;at ,w�2, _,� a.,X� •M ��(�• �� •„ � ::�' sYy}G•.t)'�#�h,,.:' `y. A. •::<':�a' a3.o- - k i }- I EL CERRITQ ���Y�'r'r'y'• Yd•:Zrir /��•$',}S . d •n}: }�'4 ..,P ... : 'y''Z •'�^t 'hr<:.iµ,+.... ..}s2 '.Fr{Y:•X;'' •g �^' ^,xy' ,' i'., �*�{=�•e_•� rS '# RICHMOND %:;x,}Eft' a,• ,,, ,•.f�. �%v.'t�> ,'3, lrk 'k ,�• ic: ry?nv}};w l.:• f aY ''C:lv 'k 'xY"✓:.'i t.. :i•;tiY 3: ':^.i 5:+:i!'' a✓:�''nnn...� SC',i'a �� C#^�i�,���7.• ^ �'>.�E_ •'$'�••Y�q, .f}•,r+,,'•".t.Y• Sr 5'^+�,�•S�'�' ^�'��"nT''. 4'C�. .r,),•4?.. :,.r,.'�}�y+r:t�� y.�. ��Y rt:`:.;'&:`.4c '':'x''"Y«':1:•a, '�`. `Y�•.'J-`wa' �}�'.{y`'•'•:w..v:'t�-a• yC+�}: ,.'•■,�'}»y:Ft{::y.�` ;i'• p i•*: '.,`£i,+{ �'$'.:,},••. •Q:. .}W..,,iY .UiY.., ..��:,p}�{i 3`!� $:�F1:'a:p.✓•%:^EG'Y:1' .,^'-r:S 'i:kv'F.r 1.'S✓w ,5..< i?k..n4.:t���"'^ }'vY f.,. `Sw:$ •5 ,.'tom ..r «'4 t:;s•. j/��('�*�/t jj.��BLO ,4.: :+,5{'"}vt}?� ..Y•tx •hie .',E ':}}• w.•?• x• .�•�r�,•w•,,�:,•w ::,`t'r,:<''rr ..x �*:t''Y�'r rvx •, •?o•- .::;:>:t- 's°;:,�{•; �' :s.,.. •.�''�------ A t ?5,.24 «::r; w z;;st::•,':« .:.s: w•'S. •• fi✓ r:,f•;:r,.�:S v .:t•.., nf,.;'.t.• .,ri ".Y' `�'. .«.,,::�; ::t'±•;r k:sr.•r. .S "#;.,. :yra, •r: .,r�.3 "X� �y�� -�+p r ::r...<...rY. w f.c. a. ;%ze^?$r .x."^ «:.... ..r"..•:5., .,,r 3.�.J UNINCORPORATED r Y��`S.'�'� �•'«r,^C' ...'.�Y:r. t.rr.,•.... �.fir,:.. •.Sgyr rc 5• �:,: w •: r}.t '� atS's•`''2" :ti:'.•:Sp,•,�rr•y,=• T ;yw� :Y"k':4;',y,{,r i'.�•� w:,�. '; '. •f:cE•w •,< All w,x :&Y,>,.''"fir"$•"rc 'C',:y« .r ' 'a �E'�T {t Rz ri••j 3't".7`Y¢", s�,q'""xr,.i++k.3'!`s.�.• r s{:3}��,w�k�r•xt#, 2E:•.- ,.t 7 - + x: .�.+.Y ;;hS•,?SXrv.+a,,ry`•.fi„ vt-i.:. t^ry :a.;C{..•nY. ;'�'',4:.+; >25 } ;2}�Si,)•>: ,�"t!pa•. <: i:f',A,Sn•• ! 7^7•`.« y,:+$ i}<:: 2 tx�s',':':3:u' .: r'e2::Y�^oabr4yt,�y.:4 +{.k,•r,,,.:1�':'•, ,qx �9: .,Y.tl,.tt :..!+.. +...rr-.??Y•}a. 4. «»,a::,l:::.:.ra.:�"wtY;:S: ..:�,...:::{:;:•:..:::i`�.',�>'' >- v43:,. .,.:;siR::,.:,�r., r:tq;.,.n IYIkTlU/ARS7'AK ¢g: „is{$^. .,7.7 <:S _ ^x:::x:•:iY-.✓r t.. ir',i,:: y.«, 4. $ :.::.=,Y,:;;!Sr:✓.?,E:..«n:;<,-zt'r•,'f+': su {'+,>•s. C'';:E 't• ,,y;, �.^eX`'$• 'i. •fit{ CM T3A2'e'►'FONTh'P1[i:K :...,F��< t:i.'% ,, }2 .�.�?;z •�"�'"�{� �.iz 4•:e��,"��•kf-f�fi: �gv 1:00+a: GbMM133/4A t1 t {x: j t} a, �i;X••i ��t 3 `"x` y k ti Q 0.5 Milts Street Base Map(c)Thomas Bras.Maps January 20031 MTC GIS f Rick Kos :. 5:. Page 2• NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates i Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary Richmond-Ar Demographics ea • According to the 2000 Census, the study area is comprised of approximately 38,000 residents. This represents about. 4% of the total 948,816 people living in Contra Costa County. Overall, the study area's population is a "young" one, with 32% of the population under the age of 18, and just 7% at or above the age of 65. • The study area is a "majority minority" area, with.34% Black, 12% Asian and 27% ty ► "other" race according to the 2000 Census. Hispanics (who may be any "race") constitute 41 % of the study area population. • Household income in the study area is significantly below the $62,000, median for the Bay Area; the Iron Triangle, North Richmond and Santa Fe all have median incomes below-$30,000. • About 13,500 people, or slightly more than 35% of the total residents in the study area, are employed. Of these, 56%,travel outside of Contra Costa County for work. • Seventy nine percent (79%) of workers c mmute by car, truck or van, while 12% use public transportation. Compared to other communities within the study area, workers in the Iron Triangle rely most heavily on public transportation (20%). • There is less of a reliance on driving and more on public transportation in the study area compared to the Bay Area, where 87% of the population commutes by car, truck or van and 10% use public transporation. `t: • Sixty eight percent (68%) of the study ar a's workers have- a commute that exceeds 30 minutes, and 25% have a commute that exceeds one hour. • Commute length in the study area is longer compared to the Bay Area, where average commute length i n 2002 was 30 minutes. • In the study area, 18% of households have no access to an automobile, with the highest rates in the Iron Triangle (26%) and North Richmond/Santa Fe (24%). In contrast, only 6.5% of households in the ounty as a whole lack access to a vehicle. • Access to vehicles is a particular issue among households headed by individuals 65 year old or more; over 30% of such households lack access, with the highest rates in the Iron Triangle. Page 3•NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summar, MEET ROPO,.. .L 1 1' AN MSP J ' ION oh"I M IS310141 Figure ES-2 Lack of Vehicular Availability 25.00% - 20-00% - 15-00% - 10.00% - 5.00% - 0.00% 5.00%2o.00%15.00%10.00%5.00%0.00% Parchester Old Town Coronado Iron North Contra San Pablo Triangle Richmond Costa County Page 4• Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary Community Outreach , Methods And Findings The Richmond-Area Community-based Transportation Plan was developed with the involvement of approximately 25 neighborhood councils and commu.nitY-based organizations in collaboration with governmental agencies and transportation providers. Two meetings with a Stakeholders Committee were held, one to get initial direction and input on the planning process and the second toget feedback on proposed strategies to solve transportation problems. Organizations invited to participate on the Stakeholders Committee are listed below: Neighborhood & Community Organizations . Atchison Village Neighborhood Council Coronado Neighborhood Council Belding Woods Neighborhood Council Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council Parchester Village Neighborhood Council Shields-Reid Neighborhood Council Santa Fe Neighborhood Council Downtown Association Of Richmond West County Toxics Coalition Robinson-Weeks Scholarship Fund United Laotian Community Development Center For Health, North Richmond Ma'an Youth Academy Rubicon Programs Laotian Organizing Project - Richmond Improvement Association Youth Service Bureau Familias Unidas Multicultural Family/Senior Center Teen Resource Center Greater Richmond Interfaith Program Brookside Community Health Center North Richmond Family Service Center Neighborhood House Of North Richmond North Richmond Community Career Center Council Of Industries-West Contra Costa County North Richmond Municipal Advisory Committee Government Agencies BART AC Transit Metropolitan Transportation Commission Contra Costa County Community Development Dept. P P Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Dept. West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Neighborhood House of North Richmond (N H NR} conducted extensive community . tY outreach. The following outlines the outreach methods and their results. Page 5 • NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary 373 iM 3 i f>� n L i 1 A N i R tk } S F 0 F1 T A T {' '1£ s,•.r 10 Tip 1 5 S..I ru IN Surveys The consultant team developed a survey, which was tested with the Stakeholders Committee and revised based on their input before being broadly distributed by Neighborhood House (NHNR). N H N R received over 1,200 surveys from various communities in Richmond and San Pablo. The overall response rate from the mailing was 3%, with particularly high response rates in North Richmond and Santa Fe neighborhoods. • In-person surveys were distributed by interns on buses, at community and senior centers, at BART stations, at the community college, at shopping malls, and at a homeless shelter. • Surveys were translated into Spanish -and Lao. Spanish/English surveys were mailed to eight neighborhood-councils. Laotian organizations distributed the surveys to their members. • The survey was posted on Neighborhood House's website. A total. of 1,093 completed surveys from residents in the target area were analyzed. The left g Y hand column lists the- combined top priorities of all respondents. The right hand column lists the top priorities by each target neighborhood. Issue: Prioritized 'I st In: BUSES NEED TO RUN: 1. More often on weekends North Richmond, Iron Triangle, Parchester Village, Santa Fe 2. Late at night*(from 9-12) Old Town San Pablo 3. Early mornings (from 6-9) Coronado IT'S MOST DIFFICULT TO GET TO: 1. Parks and recreation Coronado, Old Town San Pablo 2. Supermarket Parchester Village, Iron Triangle 3. Healthcare Santa Fe 4. School/daycare North Richmond MOST SEVERE PROBLEM: 1 . Lack of bus shelters North Richmond, Parchester Village, Santa Fe, Old Town San Pablo, Coronado 2. Need for shuttles 3. Travel time is too long Page 6•NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary Presentations Preliminary presentations describing the project and its goals were made to five neighborhood .councils, the Municipal Advisory Council, and two Laotian organizations. A few of the planned presentations did not occur, when meetings were cancelled due to sparse attendance during the summer months. Focus Groups A total of about 190 people participated in 10 separate focus groups. Focus groups were held at neighborhood councils, churches, committee meetings, and community-based organizations. The following list describes priorities that were mentioned by.at least half of the groups. The list also incorporates the prior-ities of the Stakeholders Committee. • More affordable public transit More'bus stops and shelters • Children's transportation to day care • Affordable public transit for youth attending school • More courteous bus drivers Better safety on transit for both riders and drivers - • More frequent service on weekends CommunityOpen House Approximately 35 people attended a community open house held in September at the Nevin Plaza Senior Housing apartments. People who attended were asked to both confirm the findings of the outreach process and to prioritize potential solutions. Page 7• NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary ii E f• F1.0 2 0 L I•; A f r i.n N 3 s ! ? T At 10 N S y I1 S ''r�3 0 And Their FeasibilityPotential Solutions g input of collectin from the Richmond community The process p t'Yroduced a rich list of� p p p potential transportation on i m rovements to improve mobility. The list, which was presented at the Community Open House and the Stakeholders Committee, has been modified to include updated cost figures. Low, moderate, and high cost solutions are described below. p g To Meet CommunityStrafeg�es Needs LOW COST PROGRAMS (up-to $50,000) GRAM ssof000 AC TRANSIT BUS SHELTER PROGRAM Advertising agency a to install bus shelters with ads on busy streets with minimal Y administrative cost to AC Transit; additional cost to install 10 neighborhood bus shelters at $5,000 each. (Does not include ongoing maintenance cost of neighborhood bus shelters.) BUS STOP SEATS $121000 at 20 neighborhood bus stops. An alternative is recycled- content seats on a pole are installed g p Y content benches. GUARANTEED RIDE NOME PRO-GRAM (GRH) Program already funded provides free taxi rides home from work in an emergency. Since GRH program p employer g . must be inram� project'ect involves the community working with WCCTAC to identify p g 1 � ship employers of residents in study area for additional marketing and program member . . OLDER DRIVER SAFETY AND MOBILITY LITY WORKSHOPS $2,400 Six workshops to help150 older adults to continue driving safely for longer. MODERATE COST PROGRAMS 51 900049990001 SUBSIDIZED NIGHT TAXIS $6b,000/yr. Taxi fare is subsidized for re- ualified low-An,come residents traveling from late night buses and BART to home when neighborhood buses are no longer running. Cost is for 3,000 trips a year plus administration. AUTO LOAN PROGRAM $60,000 start up, $20,000/yr. Low interest loans for employed residents to purchase cars. Start-up cost would create a revolving loan fund. Annual costs are for administration of the loan program. Page 8 • NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary LOCAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER $60,000/yr. Phone number to call for information on local transportation and help with on-line grocery ordering, with translation available. Staff would hold travel training classes and be a "bus buddy" for.first-time riders. Cost includes full-time staff located in an existing organization, anization , and grocery delivery charge subsidies. RIDES TO SUCCESS PROGRAM $84,000/yr. One bus would take qualifying persons to job training or job interviews. Funds 120 one-way rides. FLEX ROUTE NIGHT BUS $65,000-$95,0001yr. One shuttle for evening and late night connections to BART. Higher cost is for weekend service. NEIGHBORHOOD DAYTIME SHUTTLE BUS $65,,0001yr. Shuttle services that complement fixed-route transit can be very helpful in filling transit gaps and.servi ng trips to places I i ke the Richmond BART station, AC Transit centers,.H i I Itop Mal I, medical centers and supermarkets. This cost assumes service three days a week. The route and destinations will need to be further defined by the community. TRIP REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM - $75,5001yr. Volunteers are reimbursed mileage to drive qualifying individuals. Cost includes 28 cents/mile plus program administration. HIGH COST PROGRAMS ($100,000 & higher) FREE OR DISCOUNTED YOUTH BUS PASSES $3,14,000-$1.5 million/yr. Students in West Contra Costa School District would get $5 off AC Transit bus passes. At $1.5 million, low-income students would receive free busp asses. CHILDREN'S TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM $170,000/yr. Two buses would take 20 qualifying low-income children to day care or school SUBSIDIZED CAR-SHARING PROGRAM $100 000/Y r. Members could rent cars at subsidized rates of $2/hour and 22 cents/mile SUBSIDIZED CHILD CARE AT RICHMOND BART $200,0001yr. 30 subsidized day care slots at a facility near Richmond BART station. Page 9 9 NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan • Executive Summary .}v. . ............ E 'rR0F10L Aid RAN SP0RTAT10IN C0N1fifISS1 f, AC TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS $250,,000-$1/000,000 The requests voiced most often during the community outreach involved improvements to AC Transit, including increased frequency, route changes, and introduction of new routes. Any fixed route improvements that require AC Transit to acquire one additional bus will cost a minimum of $250,000 for the bus, plus an average of $87.50/hour for operations. Community comments also indicated a need for more driver training in-courtesy. . FeasibilityAnalysis To test the feasibility of implementing these improvements, each solution was -judged against a set of criteria. proposed by the consultant team and confirmed by the Stakeholders Committee. The evaluation criteria used to select the . Recommended Solutions are as follows: Financial • Overall Cost • Cost per beneficiary Funding availability and sustainability Implementation • Do-able within reasonable'time-frame • Staging (doesn't require large fixed costs to get started) Transportation Benefits • Solves multiple transportation problems Benefits relatively large number of residents • Easy to understand and access • Effective and measurable (can quantify whether transportation usage has increased) Community • Has community support • Serves communities in the study area with the greatest need (degree of transit dependency among low-income varies e.g., depends on age, auto-ownersh i p, current availability of transit) Incorporates the needs of diverse communities in terms of language and culture Each of the suggested solutions was judged against each evaluation criterion. Figure ES-3 summarizes the results of this evaluation for each broad category of criteria. Evaluation of Page 10. NelsonXNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community. .. . ..r. .. f ... .Base. d.. Transportation.. Plan Executive Summary N{ EIF R 0 w0 YjC TAN T A N S P o yh" C T I O 3 r M rj9p j S I o these measures is complicated l icated b y the fact that the solutions cover a very broad range. i� Because there are both quantitative measures and qualitative assessments, the consultant team used our knowledge and judgment to rank each major category in a range from "low" to y "high". The summar table also includes a cumulative assessment, consider.ing the rankings of each of the categories Page I1 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary Figure ES-3 Summary: Evaluation of Proposed Solutions Ranking: High (H); Medium (M); Low(L) :. E:vatuation::Cate or }? .... : :Cumulative 9. y y. t Commun�t':{ }.. :Evanation. Fan.anc�al: ::fm lementat�on : ..Trans ostation...... Low i i i to $50,000 • year) Bus shelters H H H H H Bus stop seats H H M M M Guaranteed Ride H H L L L-M Home Older Driver Safety and Mobility H H M L M Workshop Moderate cost solutions ($51,000 to $99,00 per year) Subsidized taxis M M M-H H M-H Auto Loan Program M H L L M Local transportation MM M M M center Rides to Success M M - L-M L L Flex route night bus L - L H H M Day-time neighborhood M L H H M-H shuttle Trip Reimbursement M M H L M Program. High cost solutions ($100,000 or i per • , Free or Discounted L H M H M youth pass program Children's Transportation L H L-M H M Program expansion Subsidized Car- sharing Program Subsidized Child C L M L L L Care AC Transit L M H H M Improvements Bikeway and L M M M M pedestrian paths Page 12 •Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates r Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary Recommendations The results of the summary table suggest that the community should focus on affordable, effective and popular solutions in the short term, while perhaps building momentum to implement more complex and expensive solutions in the future. Recommended Low Cost Solutions Bus shelters Bus seats or benches • Older Driver Safety and Mobility Workshops Increasing the number of bus shelters would be a very p p program,ram,popular ro and it would also be affordable and yield.real benefits, increasing the comfort and ease of transit use. While it is not the solution that will have the greatest transportation impacts, it is one that can produce real results in a short-time frame, and for that reason is worthy of support. Other low cost solutions -that may be considered are installing bus seats or benches . (particularly in areas where bus shelters may not be appropriate), and hosting Older Driver workshops. Both of these programs are ver low cost and can develop momentum and g Y p _ visibility for a neighborhood specific transportation program. Recommended Medium Cost Solutions • Subsidized Taxi or Flex-route Night Bus • Neighborhood Daytime Shuttle • Local Transportation Center The medium cost solutions are more complex administratively, and, therefore, will take more time to implement than the low cost solutions. The community should focus on narrowing down these solutions to one that it will make a priority. The evaluation suggests that either a Subsidized Taxi or a Flex-Route Bus at night could produce real transportation benefits for modest cost. The taxi program is affordable if limited to an occasional "lifeline" service when there are few transportation alternatives. if a daily service is needed by a large number of patrons, a flex-route night bus would quickly become more cost-effective. It may be possible to test the project by beginning with a subsidized taxi at night and graduating to a flex-route bus, if the need for more service is demonstrated. The Neighborhood Daytime Shuttle program has a high level of benefit for the investment, as-well as strongcommunity Y support. However, the Daytime Shuttle has not been well-defined by the community and, therefore, merits further investigation on a list of feasible projects to pursue: Creating a Local Transportation Center can benefit a large number of residents by providing an information clearinghouse for existing transportation resources. It also has the potential to focus community efforts on implementing the final Plan. Page 13 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary Recommended High Cost Solutions The majority of the high cost solutions also require involvement of a public agency in their implementation. This fact, combined with their cost, means that pursuing these solutions will not reward the community with short-term, tangible progress on their transportation problems. Nevertheless, the community has an important advocacy role requiring immediate attention. The time to strongly support the Free Youth Bus Pass Program as a priority is now, since its inclusion in a proposed funding plan will be decided in Spring 2004. WCCTAC has requested funding for Free Youth Bus Passes in its submittal to the Measure C reauthorization plan being developed by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority_i (CCTA). In early 2004, the CCTA Board of Directors will choose the projects that will go into the half-cent transportation sales tax measure and be voted-upon by the electorate in November 2004. Since West County schools do not_have school buses, and since many children miss school for lack of bus money, a compelling case can be made for the Free Youth Bus Pass Program, school busing or some other youth transportationro ram despite the high cost. p g p g If Measure C. is renewed by the voters, the new funds will not be available until 20'09. However, if the projects in the Richmond-area Community-Based Transportation Plan are not broadly incorporated in the language now, they will not be eligible later. Therefore, the community should also advocate that the Measure.C language be written inclusively enoug h to encompass other high-cost solutions, such as expansion of the Children's Transportation Program and Safe Routes to School, in the list of possible projects. Nor should the community ignore some of the other mostressin transportation issues. p g p Improvements to the frequency of AC Transit bus service, for instance, have the highest level of transportation benefits and community support. Therefore, the community shou-Id' be diligent and articulate in advocating for increased service. It is widely understood, however, that it is unlikely for any improvement to be possible until regional and state economic conditions improve. AC Transit will be conducting a route study in the area in 2004 and has indicated an intention to incorporate the findings of this stud as starting Y a g point for additional analysis. While bikeways and pedestrian paths are proects that would need to be constructed b�jy the city or county, community organizations can partner with their public agency in applying for several competitive funding programs.. Here again, the community also needs to advocate to city and county leaders for its share of public works and Measure C funds to complete bikeways and Safe Routes to School in the Richmond area and to urge decision- makers to apply for applicable grants for these projects. Page 14• Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan • Executive Summary N',E T t POLIF, A1'1 TRANSPO i TION COSY N111 SIG Funding Most of the funding for public transit is derived from state and federal funds that are distributed according to formulae based on population and ridership. Therefore, this funding section focuses on sources that are not formula funds but are competitive programs or revenues from non-traditional sources. Government Sources Current Funding Programs Low Income Flexible Transportation Program (LIFT) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) partnered with local transit and social services agencies to respond to the challenge of improving transportation services for residents of low-income communities by initiating the Low Income Flexible Transportation (LIFT) Program. Projects require a local match. A new round of proposals for LIFT funds will occur in 2004. Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) MTC created this innovative program to fund community-oriented transportation projects. TLC planning grants of up to $75,000 are awarded to help sponsors refine and elaborate promising project ideas. The next-cycle will be in Spring 2004. Capital grants for projects that directly support construction range in size from $150,000 to $2 million per project. However, the next capital grant cycle is not scheduled until 2005. Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) Through the Bicycle Transportation Account, Caltrans provided $7.2 million in 2002 to local communities for capital projects intended to improve and increase bicycle commuting. Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) The Transportation Fund for Clean Air is a grant program funded by a $4 surcharge on vehicles registered in the Bay Area, which generates about $20 million a year. The goal of TFCA is to decrease vehicle emissions in order to improve air quality. -The fund includes a wide range of project types, such as shuttle and feeder bus service to train stations, rideshari.ng programs to encourage carpool and transit use, bike lanes, and information projects to enhance the availability of transit information. Only public agencies can apply for TFCA funds. Page 15 • Nelsonikygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary Safe Routes to.School (SR2S) The State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) will be soliciting project applications from cities and counties in California for.Safe Routes to School (SR2S) funding next year. The application deadline is February 27, 2004, with approval of selected1 ro'ects by Fall 2004. p SR2S is a construction program, intended to improve and enhance the safety of pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The maximum reimbursement for all projects will be $450,000, with the local agency providing a 10% local match. Older Americans Act (OAA) Transportation is a major service under the Older Americans Act providing needed access ► p g to nutrition, medical and other essential services. No funding is specifically designated for transportation. However, funding can be used, for transportation under several sections of the Act. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) The CDBG program is a federal program of grants to local governments. Both government agencies and nonprofit organizations are eligible for funding. The City of Richmond and Contra Costa County allocate CDBG funds in a competitive process to low-income areas. West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (WCCIWMA g Y ) WCCIWMA is a joint powers agency created by the Cities of EI Cerrito Hercules Pinole Richmond and San Pablo.to implement a State law requiring a good faith effort at reducing the amount of material going to landfill by 50%. The Authority sponsors onsors a "mini-grant" g program to fund efforts resulting in areduction of waste sent to the West County landfill. Potential Future Government Funding Sources Senate Bill 916: Election for $1 Toll Increase Senator Don Perata has introduced Senate B i I l'(S B) 916, which will allow voters to dedicate an additional $1 toll on all state-owned bridges (excluding the Golden Gate Bridge) in the Bay Area to fund projects in seven bridge corridors. The measure, which requires a majority . tY vote, will be placed on the March 2004 ballot. Renewal of Contra Costa County's Measure C Measure C is the transportation half-cent sales tax initiative that was approved b the voters pp Y in 1988. Measure. C sales tax receipts support transportation improvement projects and growth management in Contra Costa County. The current tax expires in 2009 and a renewal proposal to extend the sales tax is planned for the November 2004 ballot. A two- thirds wo- thirds vote of approval is required. Page 16• NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates R Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary METrROPOLI E AN TIR AN 5 PORTATION kCA' 0 MM ISS-10 N Transportation 2030 (T2030) MTC is updating the Ba Area's long-range transportation plan for the years 2005-2030. of p g Y the total $87.4 billion in transportation revenues that MTC anticipates coming to the Bay Area during the next quarter century,' 23% ($19.7 billion) provides for new projects or Y s stem expansion. Although no direct funding is provided from the regional transportation plan, projects must be included in the plan to be eligible for future funding allocations from MTC. State Environmental Justice and Community Based Transportation Planning Grants (EJB Caltrans the California Department of Transportation--introduced two.grant.programs in 2001-02 that would have applicability to the Richmond-area projects; the Environmental justice Grant Program and the Community Based Transportation Planning Grant Program. Because of the State's budget deficits, it is unlikely that these grants will be available in the near term, although the programs may be revived in the future. Private Foundations Many small, focused projects that target lqw-income populations are eligible for foundation grants. This list-of seven promising foundations is by no means exhaustive but is suggestive of the types of grants that may be available. Foundation grants are highly competitive and more research would be needed before applying. - Robert Wood Johnson Foundation • Nathan Cummings Foundation • William G. Irwin Charity Foundation • Zel lerbach Family Foundation • East Bay Community Foundation Surdna Foundation 0 Ralp hs-Food 4 Less Foundation other Sources Advertising Agency AC Transit contracts with an advertising agency to install and maintain bus shelters on major streets throughout the district in return for placement of advertising on the shelters. Local retailers Businesses that would benefit from increased customers, such as grocery stores and shopping malls, might consider funding part of the costs of a shuttle. Page 17• NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary $ffS!!'�'t.. .� a a• yr IFA 6 •�;• tr+v n !S; •c ;• )/+� 3y,✓•. € �f�r••�} C a tai•} r x i+t;' co �rA., y��e? 4s; Fil� E •{• R O P O 1, f F.ate'}.N 5 7 i A [�: `:.,f P 0 i�i � �'�ya f i 4r N C W" IVII M I S S:) F�` N Service clubs and fraternal organizations Organizations such as the Rotary Club, Soroptomists, Kiwanis, and Lions often take on special projects. Employers Employers who are in need of workers are sometimes willing to underwrite transportation in order to fill their labor needs. Developers Residents should be alert to new projects proposed for their community as the developers seek approval from•the City of Richmond or Contra Costa County. Transportation impacts on.the community can be mitigated by conditions on the project's approval. Figure ES-4 suggests funding sources that may be applicable to each of the projects described in this Plan. Page 18 • NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond Community Based Transportation Plan Executive Summary ME ROPOL IT AN T RAN SPORT ATIO C0MMI %QWSIGN Figure ES-4 Potential FundingSources Y r. . . S.OIUt1.Ot1: . F Low-cost solutions ndln :Aencles l Bus shelters Ad agency, CDBG, Irwin Found. Bus stops seatsibenches TLC, CDBG, WCCIWMA, Irwin Found.,service clubs Guaranteed Ride Home Measure C Older Driver Workshops OAA., East Bay Found. Moderate-cost solutions Subsidized taxis CDBG Auto Loan program LIFT, CDBG Local transportation center LIFT, TFCA, CDBG, Zellerbach Found., East Bay Found. Rides to Success program LIFT, CDBG, East Bay Found. Flex route night bus LI FT,TFCA,T2030, EJ, Surdna Found. Neighborhood Daytime Shuttle Depends on clientele: OAA, Measure C, T2030, EJ,Johnson Found., Cummings Found:, Irwin Found.,Zellerbach Found.,Surdna Found., Ralphs Food 4 Less Found., retailers, service clubs Trip Reimbursement program LIFT, OAA, CDBG, Measure C paratransit funds,service clubs High-cost solutions Discounted youth AC Transit Measure C,T2030, Zellerbach Found., Ralphs Food 4 Less Found. passes Children's transportation LIFT, CDBG, Measure C, Irwin Found.,Zellerbach Found., East Bay Found., program Ralphs Food 4 Less, service clubs Subsidized carsharing program LIFT,TFCA, CDBG, T2030, Surdna Found. Subsidized child care at BART Ralphs Food 4 Less Found.; Service clubs;TLC or Surdna Found. for construction AC Transit improvements SB 916, Measure C, T2030 Bikeways TLC, TFCA, BTA, SR2S,SB 916, Measure C,T2030, Johnson Found. Legend: BTA: Bicycle Transportation Account T2030:regional transportation plan CDBG: Community Development Black Grants TFCA:Transportation Fund for Clean Air EJ: Environmental Justice grant TLC: Transportation for Livable Communities LIFT: Low Income Flexible Transportation Program SB 916: proposed $1 bridge toll increase Measure C: renewal of 112 cent sales tax WCCIWMA:West Contra Costa waste Management OAA: Older Americans Act federal funds SR2S: Safe Routes to School funds Page 19 • NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Richmond .Community Based Transportation Plan • Executive Summary Implementation This section discusses actions needed in order to move the Richmond-area Community- based tY based Transportation Plan from the planning process into implementation. Early implementation is important not only to solve some of the transportationrob'lems faced b p Y the residents but also to keep faith with the community and blunt cynicism about this and future efforts. Richmond-Area Transportation Action Committipe The.key recommendation of this plan is the formation of an ongoing committee made up of community representatives committed to implementing this Plan. Staff of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has indicated a willingness to work with the community in the initial formation of this Transportation Action Committee. Neighborhood House of North Richmond, as the lead agency for the West County Health Initiative, has agreed to convene at least the first few meetings of a new transportation subcommittee with theg oal of finalizing an ongoing structure.for transportation implementation. Funding Beyond the formation of a Transportation Action Committee the next important ste is to p identify funding for the recommended projects. ' This first agenda item for the Committee will require immediate attention of the group, since inclusion ofro'ects to be funded b p 1 Y the Measure C half-cent transportation sales tax reauthorization and projects incorporated into the regional Transportation 2030 plan will be decided by Spring 2004. AC Transit Improvements AC Transit intends to initiate a route planning study of its service in the Richmond area in early 2004. The Transportation Action Committee recommended by this Plan could be a sounding board for strategies proposed by AC Transit staff. The Committee is also an appropriate forum for advocating that specific improvements identified by the community be implemented when regional and state economic conditions improve. Lead Agencies As part of the Plan's development, Neighborhood House has already held discussions with some of the stakeholders in order to identify organizations or individuals who might take the lead on various projects. The full _Plan describes initial steps these leaders should take to implement the recommended projects, once funding has been identified. Page 20 • NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates The Board of Supervisors Contra John Sweeten County Administration Building Clerk of the Board 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Costa and Martinez,California 94553-1293 County Administrator oun (925)335-1900 John Gioia,1st District Gayle B.Uilkema,2nd District Millie Greenberg,3rd District Mark DeSaulnier,4th District - Federal D.Glover,5th District COUP, March 16, 2004 The Honorable Steve Kinsey Chair, Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland CA 94607 Dear Chair Kinsey: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on March 16 expressed its support for the Richmond Community-Based Transportation Plan recently completed by MTC and Neighborhood House of North Richmond. The plan sets forth promising short-term and long-term strategies that directly address the transportation needs expressed by Richmond and North Richmond residents during the planning process. The plan is consistent with Contra Costa County's Welfare-to-Work Transportation Action Plan . These two plans complement each other and provide the framework for implementation of effective neighborhood-based services,providing that adequate funding is obtained. The Board of Supervisors appreciates the opportunity to review the MTC plan. We also ask that MTC consider the Rodeo community for similar planning if another round of this type of yp transportation plan is developed in the future. Our staff will communicate this request to MTC staff in more detail. Like North Richmond, the unincorporated community of Rodeo is home to numerous lower-income residents who have difficulty traveling to job centers due in large part to transportation limitations. The Board believes the Rodeo community could benefit greatly from a similar planning effort. Thank you for MTC's efforts to help improve transportation services in the North Richmond community. Sincerely, _ a ederal D. Glover, Chair Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors FDGUG