[sf_eddo]

Part 5

What it will take to fix Bay Area transit crisis

By Mike Rosenberg
Bay Area News Group
Posted: 01/13/2010 01:01:56 PM PST
Updated: 01/13/2010 09:54:54 PM PST

For Bay Area transit agencies to emerge stronger from their plight, extensive changes will be required, most likely including new taxes and a shift in the way commuters travel and leaders plan cities.

Experts, politicians, commuters and others interviewed for this series offered many ideas that could spur ridership and help public transit providers crawl out of budget holes. But there is doubt that the region can muster the political will to make the solutions happen.

Several experts say land use and planning will play a key role.

Environmentalists, transit agencies and regional government bodies have lobbied for more homes, shops and amenities near train and bus centers, a concept known as transit-oriented development. The 257,000-square-foot Fruitvale Transit Village in Oakland is a shining example, but there are others in the works or standing in Pleasant Hill, Richmond and elsewhere.

The most recent government survey available, from 2000, shows those living within a half-mile of a Bay Area ferry or train station were four times more likely than others to take transit. Only 4 percent of those whose homes and jobs were more than a half-mile from a station used transit, compared with 42 percent for those with both within a half-mile.

"This is the way of the future," said Allison Brooks, chief of staff at Oakland-based Reconnecting America, which operates the Center for Transit-Oriented Development. "The trend is there, and a lot of cities want to make this happen. But the investment isn't there."

Ridership questions

There are questions, however, about whether these developments actually increase transit ridership. UC Transportation Center Director Robert Cervero, a leading transit-oriented development expert, said many transit village residents fulfill the "self-selection" process, meaning they are longtime transit riders who move near a transit hub.

There are also few opportunities left to build transit villages without cities either buying out or forcing out property owners. Of the 96,614 acres of land within a half-mile of Bay Area transit stations, only 5,488 acres are vacant or underutilized, according to a Reconnecting America land analysis.

Aside from building close to hubs, some have suggested more corporate shuttles, such as the one Genentech runs from some BART and Caltrain stations to its South San Francisco campus.

Not surprisingly, most agree land-use advances will do little to soothe Bay Area transit troubles if train and bus operators can't solve their financial problems and offer convenient, affordable rides. If middle-class commuters are to ditch their cars for transit, it may be up to local governments, transit agencies and taxpayers to help make that shift.

The federal government has in recent memory provided no operational support for transit agencies. The state had provided a key lift, long supplying Bay Area transit agencies with $100 million to $200 million a year until 2006. But in the past three years, the state has taken $532 million that would have gone to Bay Area transit budgets and another $189 million from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

Despite the California Transit Association's successful lawsuit against the practice, local transit agencies expect the state to find an accounting trick to satisfy the judge's demands and keep the money in state coffers for at least the next few years.

Local taxpayers take the hit?

That leaves local taxpayers to foot the bill.

Of the 12 transportation-related tax measures put on ballots in 2008 by local agencies in California, voters passed 11. The Bay Area is aiming for a November 2012 ballot measure that would provide regional revenue for transit.

A group of transit officials, regional planners and outside experts called the Transit Sustainability Project are tasked with figuring out what type of measure it would be, and a gas tax of up to 10 cents has been gaining steam among some leaders. MTC Executive Director Steve Heminger calls the gas tax a carbon tax by another name, and says $4-a-gallon gas is the best thing that ever happened to transit ridership.

But cash flow is only half the budget picture. The Transit Sustainability Project is also aiming to cut costs, possibly by merging some of the 28 transit agencies that run similar routes and pull profits away from one another.

Experts and transit agencies are mostly divided into two camps: Those believing in the "if you build it, they will ride it" mentality say taxpayers should invest in infrastructure, such as rail extensions and new stations, while others lobby instead for more efficient service. The latter may be more realistic given recent funding problems.

Because of the economic backdrop, turning around local transit troubles is likely to prove challenging and require support from both politicians and the public, said Susan Shaheen, co-director of UC-Berkeley's Transportation Sustainability Research Center.

Although the shift would be costly and time-consuming, it would be a significant one for commuters, the economy and the environment.

As U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a recent blog post: "Our future rides on public transportation."

Source: http://www.mercurynews.com/search/ci_14181164