##################################################################

TRANSPORTATION THINK TANK NOTES FROM MEETING #13: JULY 21, 1999

##################################################################

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<> NEXT MEETING: WEDNESDAY AUGUST 4, 1999 <>
<> STARTING at 5 pm, at CAFE BRASIL <>
<> 1410 MISSSION STREET, SANTA CRUZ <>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

AGENDA for AUG 4: We might preview the choices to be before the SCCRTC
at its meeting August 5, 7:30 pm at the Board of Sups Chambers,
5th floor, County Government Center, a meeting we should all attend.
(Will the Commissioners help us to reduce our dependence on our cars?)

[NOTE: Generally we will plan to meet in SANTA CRUZ (Cafe Brasil) on
the FIRST wednesday of each month, and in APTOS (Firehouse) on the
THIRD wednesday of each month.]

Our July 21 meeting in Aptos began shortly after 5 pm. Attending were
Kim Chin, Bill Comfort, Bruce Gabriel, Barbara Graves, Madeleine Hormann,
Emily Reilly, Peter Scott, Janet Singer, Michael Singer, Marcela
Tavantzis and Dave Walworth.

We welcomed both Marcela Tavantzis (Assistant (Deputy?) City Manager for
Watsonville) and Kim Chin (Manager of Planning and Marketing for the SCMTD).

During introductions Peter told a story, which he will append to these
notes.*

WATSONVILLE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES:

Marcela (we had asked her about Watsonville public transportation
issues) spoke of a survey whose results are now being prepared for
presentation to the Watsonville City Council, in which groups of
Watsonville residents were surveyed on a variety of community issues.
Among the questions was one that asked "What would get you to drive
less?" [I may not have got this quote exactly right.] The results of
the survey, which was contracted for and done professionally, are very
interesting. We learned about a number of findings that were
unexpected, and many that are NOT consonant with the stereotypical view
of the Watsonville community. However the results are not public yet.
They will become public August 24 when they are presented to the Council.

Bill Comfort facilitated the remainder of the meeting.

TRANSIT DISTRICT ISSUES:

Kim Chin spoke to questions that we had sent out in our announcement
for the meeting, and told us that the Transit District is now in the
process of a baseline study that will continue for another two months
more or less. These are exciting times, he said. We have good political
support for public transit at both the state and federal level (as
well as locally) and we have an excellent General Manager of the
District, so we are in a good position to move ahead. The Watsonville
survey comes at a good time. Kim spoke of overloads in the
Watsonville-Santa Cruz corridor. He also mentioned the #81, which is
a new service linking Watsonville with Capitola, and facilitated by
the SCCRTC. He noted that many locations in the District want
increased service and that overloads are being experienced on several
routes. He later on referred to the Hwy 17 service (which will very
likely be operated by the District as a result of recent efforts by
the SCMTD Board) as a "black hole"---if more service is provided it is
overloaded right away. Bill and Madeleine responded with "that's a
black hole we like". (The Hwy 17 bus service will likely be extended to
Watsonville, along with other desired improvements.)

Barbara asked about the definition of "overload"; she had heard a
southern California concept of twice the seating capacity of the bus
and thought that was extreme.

Kim said that our District defines "overload" to mean 1.5 times the
seating capacity of the bus, and that the reaching of that point
generates a phone call for a "tripper"---an additional bus to pick up
those left behind on the curb by an overloaded bus.

Bill asked if a requested tripper can actually react quickly enough to
get to where it is needed. Kim said "yes".

Emily mentioned that she has at times noticed and extra bus waiting near
her house near Laurel and King, presumably backups or trippers for the
UCSC #1 route.

One of our questions related to the distinction between the "five-year
unconstrained plan" (M3 in the RTC's wish list) and the "aggressive bus
improvements" (alternative 8 in the MTIS). It was noted that there
seems to be support both in the community and on the Commission for
improved bus service generally.

The "five-year unconstrained plan", if extrapolated to the year 2015,
would imply about 350,000 service hours per year, whereas the "aggressive"
plan has a 2015 goal of nearly 413,000 service hours per year.
(Currently we are at about 210,000; prior to the earthquake-induced cuts
in service it was less than 250,000.)

DISCUSSION RE the CONSOLIDATED OPERATING FACILITY PROPOSAL:

Kim noted the issue of the "consolidated operating facility" (COF)
(unofficially also known as the "metro base"). Its existence would
result in savings that could amount to about $2 million per year by
eliminating current inefficiency costs. Such a facility is needed
now, and would certainly be needed for either of the two improved bus
plans now under consideration.

Bruce Gabriel put in a plug for the COF, and noted that his opinion
piece supporting it was to appear in the Sunday Sentinel.

Kim noted that it was hoped and expected that a COF would be on line in
the year 2002. He urged us to support the proposed site at Swift and
Delaware, noting that while there were both supporters and critics for
this site, it was nevertheless the best of over 12 sites looked at. It
would serve the District well, being especially convenient for the UCSC
routes, as well as the Route 17, the San Lorenzo Valley, and the Santa
Cruz-to-Watsonville routes.

Considerable attention is being given to ensure that traffic impacts on
the Mission Street corridor are kept to a minimum, and that noise and
pollution issues are appropriately dealt with. He also noted that while
the COF/metrobase project did receive a negative declaration in 1995,
they are considering a proper EIR, or at least a focused EIR to consider
overall transportation-related impacts. A COF in Watsonville (this
alternative might use the operations and maintenance (O&M) site there)
would involve impacts on the Hwy 1 corridor that would be more
problematic than impacts on Mission Street.

The question of whether the Watsonville O&M site was envisioned for
"surplus" once any other COF were in place was brought up. Marcela
noted that "we have people lined up to use the Watsonville site, but we
have to wait until it is surplused". Kim noted that the issue is under
consideration, but has not been concluded; the District needs direction
from the SCMTD Board.

Janet asked whether the Santa Cruz City Transportation Commission had
been or will be consulted.

Emily said that the City has asked to be in the loop, and wanted to
take a proactive role. Barbara asked about the role of the City
Planning Commission. Emily said that in her central location on
Mission Street she gets lots of questions (like "how can it not
increase traffic?" and "if it's true that it won't have a big traffic
impact, why is Les White concerned?"), and needs answers.

Bill suggested that the City Transportation Commission invite the
SCMTD to make a presentation, and Janet suggested a community workshop
at Bay View School. Marcela brought up the point of redevelopment
implying loss of tax revenue, and Kim acknowledged that an issue
involves tradeoffs of this nature---loss of tax revenue vs public
benefit. Emily remarked that "these kinds of issues need to be in
bulleted form" in order to present a clear picture, and Kim said he
would share our ideas with Les White and others.

It was suggested that we (the TTT) could sponsor a forum on the issues.

ISSUES RE FUNDING:

Kim outlined funding proposals needed to accomplish the goal of 350,000
service hours implied by the (extended) "5-year unconstrained" plan.
The first three are apparently fairly probable funding sources.
The next two are somewhat higher risk, being more competitive:

1. FTA Sec 5307 formula federal funds: $37.0 million
2. FTA Sec 5309 discretionary federal funds: $25.5 million
3. State Transit Assistance (STA) funds: $11.9 million
4. CMAQ/STP funds: $23.3 million
5. SB45/RTIP funds: $34.0 million
---------------
Total: $131.7 million

[Detailed budgets leading to this summary may be found in a staff
report considered by the SCMTD Board on June 11, 1999. The process is
considerably more complex than is implied by this simple table.
Operating and Maintenance expenses amount to about $25 to $26 million
per year, funded mainly by existing sales tax, TDA and farebox
revenues.]

The District is working with our Congressional and State representatives
to lobby for this desired funding.

CODA:

We ended our meeting with brief notes by Kim re bicycles and buses,
and a brief mention of "flyer stops":

(a) Two bikes per bus rack is apparently the maximum we can expect
right now.

(b) Up to twelve (12) bikes per DAY are left behind on buses! After
30 days in "lost and found" they are forwarded to the SCPD for auction.

It is desireable to make use of "flyer stops" for bus routes on
limited access freeway-type routes, such as those at the Pasatiempo
Exit and the Freedom Blvd exit.

We adjourned at approximately 6:35 pm, agreeing to schedule alternate
meetings at this good mid-county site. (We'll meet August 4 in Santa
Cruz.) Considerable appreciation and thanks are due to both Marcela
Tavantzis and Kim Chin for their positive and productive contributions
to our meeting.

-- Peter Scott, note-taker

---------------------
* [a story: I decided to use my bicycle to attend this meeting.
Consulting a copy of "Headways", I deduced that the #91 commuter express
should leave Swift and Mission (2 blocks from my house) at 4:20 pm
and stop at Cabrillo College at 4:50 pm, not far from our meeting
venue. So I waited at the stop in front of the Linda Vista Market, but
saw no #91 bus. Along came a #2 bus, so I asked its driver about the
#91. He kindly used his telephone to call the #91 driver, and told me
that the #91 did not stop where I was waiting, but would be coming up
Almar to head east on Mission, so I started biking east on Mission,
glimpsed my bus ahead of me, and chased it all the way to the Metro
Center, where I was fortunately able to catch it. I arrived at our
meeting just a minute or two past 5 pm. Thanks are owed to that #2
bus driver and to the SCMTD for such service-oriented driver training.
After the meeting I could have returned via the #91, but decided
instead to ride all the way on Soquel Drive/Ave with Madeleine, who
had ridden her bicycle to the meeting. It was a good ride back to
Santa Cruz, taking less than half an hour.]


||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|| TO BE REMOVED FROM THIS EMAIL LIST, WRITE TO PETER ||
|| drip@cats.ucsc.edu WHO WILL TAKE YOU OFF ||
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||