Joyce Roy: Senate Public Hearing on Regional Governance in SF this Thursday

This guest post was written by Joyce Roy. As a retired architect, Joyce has raised her sights (or sites?) to the whole city of Oakland and so has been active in advocating for better transit, the right development in the right place and the reuse of existing structures.  She is an active member of ULTRA.

This is for those of you who were disturbed by the recent decision of MTC (Metropolitan Transportation Commission) to leave the headquarters they share with ABAG (Association of Bay Area Governments) and use Bridge toll funds for real estate speculation by purchasing a too-big warehouse in a transit-challenged location. It was not just in itself an unwise, and possibly, illegal action, but a loud and clear symptom of the Bay Area’s transportation/land-use disconnect due to the difficulty of comprehensive planning without regional governance which would combine the functions of MTC, ABAG, the Air District and BCDC.

Here is your chance to have your concerns heard by our State Senate:

Senate Transportation & Housing Informational Hearing-
SUBJECT: Regional Governance and Bay Area Economic Development

December 8, 2011
10:00 am – 1:00 pm in the Legislative Chamber of San Francisco City Hall, Room 250

You can be assured that your comments will be given serious attention because the Chair of the Senate Transportation & Housing Committee, Mark DeSaulnier, has served on MTC, ABAG, and the Air District so he understands the dysfunctional separation of those regional agencies.

MTC poised to purchase San Francisco building, but Senator DeSaulnier not backing down

Two weeks ago the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) voted to move their headquarters to San Francisco, despite an ongoing state audit initiated by Senate Transportation Committee Chair Mark DeSaulnier. At the time, one bit of hope was that MTC might be outbid by another entity because staff claimed that there was now competition for the building and that if the MTC didn’t move quickly, they might lose out on the opportunity to buy it.

Who knows if others were bidding on it, but it now seems as if MTC is close to making the purchase. This Wednesday they will meet in closed session to negotiate the purchase, and then in open session to discuss the deal and financing.

In my last blog post on this issue, I mentioned that Senator Mark DeSaulnier is not so pleased that MTC is moving forward with the building purchase and questionable use of toll funds. He said at the time that he would hold hearings and introduce a bill to drastically overhaul MTC. Since writing that, I saw another article where he explained in a bit more detail what he plans to do:

MTC approves move to San Francisco, triggering Senator DeSaulnier to commit to drastically overhaul the agency

Sadly, but unsurprisingly, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) voted yesterday to approve the purchase of 390 Main Street in San Francisco for their new headquarters. I attempted to listen to the audio of the meeting while it was happening yesterday, but once again the MTC’s audio feed was faulty (the same thing happened during their last meeting about the move) so I was unable to.

I was able to follow the meeting yesterday on Twitter, thanks to San Francisco Chronicle reporter Michael Cabanatuan @ctuan. (If you’re not following him on Twitter, you should.)

And thankfully, Joyce Roy attended the meeting and wrote this report:

Despite ongoing state audit, MTC poised to move to San Francisco; ABAG unlikely to join them

You might remember that two months ago, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) voted to move their headquarters from Oakland to San Francisco. After the City of Oakland raised questions of Brown Act violations in this initial vote, the MTC voted in August to rescind its initial vote and to create a committee that would review the decision and return with a recommendation to the MTC within 60 days.

To recap, in case you missed the excellent guest blog post from Joyce Roy about this issue a month ago, the MTC has been searching for a new headquarters for MTC and the Associations of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) – who currently share offices next to the Lake Merritt BART station – as well as the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Air District). The plan for the three agencies to locate together makes total sense, as they work together frequently and it would make it easier for the public to interact with the three agencies. MTC narrowed down their location search to two options – building a new building on top of the 12th Street BART station in downtown Oakland at 1100 Broadway or purchasing a 1940’s warehouse half a mile from BART in San Francisco at 390 Main Street. At the meeting in August, East Bay officials and advocates turned out in force, advocating for the Oakland site, and State Senator Mark DeSaulnier – chair of the Senate Transportation Committee – sent a letter informing the Commission that his committee would audit their proposed use of bridge toll funds for the move to San Francisco.

It hasn’t been 60 days yet, but the committee appointed at that August meeting has apparently completed its work and recommended that the MTC move forward with its initial plans to move to San Francisco. The MTC will be voting tomorrow, Wednesday morning, September 28th on whether to move forward with the San Francisco building purchase (meeting details at the end of this post).

MTC does the right thing, rescinds vote to move to San Francisco

I’ll have a more complete update in the coming weeks, and I realize most have already heard what happened, but I wanted to give an update on Wednesday’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) meeting. I attended most of the meeting and spoke but had to get to work before the commissioners spoke or voted. Luckily, others were able to stay and shared the good news that the MTC voted to rescind their July vote to purchase 390 Main Street in San Francisco and to set up a committee to further research the relocation of their headquarters.

This is huge and I want to thank everyone who helped make this happen. Thanks to Joyce Roy for writing an excellent guest blog post here that mobilized dozens to write the commissioners or to speak on Wednesday. Thanks to everyone who spoke on Wednesday, including many elected officials and advocates. And thanks to State Senator Mark DeSaulnier and the several senators who signed on to his letter to the MTC questioning this purchase and the use of bridge toll funds.

Now on to the updates. The first one is from Joan Lichterman:

Joyce Roy: MTC stealth action contradicts sustainability policy

This guest post was written by Joyce Roy. As a retired architect, Joyce has raised her sights (or sites?) to the whole city of Oakland and so has been active in advocating for better transit, the right development in the right place and the reuse of existing structures.  She is an active member of ULTRA.

With little public knowledge or input, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) voted on July 27 to purchase a 1940’s warehouse in a desolate San Francisco area, a half-mile from BART, for a new headquarters to share with other regional agencies.  This violates their own land use policy of locating ”job centers within a quarter mile of transit.”  And it will take many years and more than the $180 million allocated to transform this 8-story humongous plug-ugly warehouse into humane habitable office spaces. No matter how much money is sunk into this building, it is doubtful it can be rated a Class-A office building because of its location.

MTC has another choice, a superbly sustainable one, for $153 million—a proposed new, fully entitled, 20-story Class-A office tower above the 12th Street BART Station at 1100 Broadway in downtown Oakland which will be LEED Platinum certified! With 310,000 square feet of office space and 10,000 square feet of public/retail space on the ground floor, it would more than meet the needs of all three (or four?) regional agencies—it would become a signature regional center.  And the façade of the attached Historic Key System building, the birthplace of Bay Area mass transit, would be restored! What better demonstration of sustainable development could there be?

So You Think You Can Dance: The Paramount’s in Oakland, not San Francisco

I don’t know how many of you watched the season premiere of So You Think You Can Dance last week. (For those who didn’t and who probably are wondering why I’m writing about this and how it could possibly be connected to living in the O, just bear with me for a moment.) The episode was super exciting for me because it featured the Paramount, where the Bay Area auditions happened, and more so because my brother-in-law was one of the people auditioning.

Throughout the episode, the Paramount was featured. They showed off the stage, many of the beautiful interior details, and the marquee outside. It was awesome to see the Paramount highlighted so much.

What was not so awesome was that the show pretended that the Paramount was in San Francisco! And it wasn’t just a slip up done once or twice. Throughout the show, the auditions were referred to as the San Francisco auditions, and the scenery footage used was of the Golden Gate Bridge and other iconic San Francisco landmarks.

When BART reaches capacity, Oaklanders will be the first to suffer

For anyone who commutes between Oakland and San Francisco, I’m guessing this has been a bit of a chaotic week. And at some point, if not every day during the closure, you probably took BART across the Bay. And I have no doubt that it was beyond crowded in the stations and on the trains. I heard from several people who had to let a couple trains pass by before finding a train that had room, during the morning and evening commute.

But this was an emergency. The Bay Bridge had to be repaired immediately, and though it was probably very stressful to deal with the chaos at BART, there was probably a comforting thought at the back of your head during this experience – “It will soon be over.” You figured that once the bridge was fixed, BART would go back to a “normal” level of ridership – morning transbay ridership would go back to 50,000 instead of nearly 80,000. You’d be able to relax at the station and hop on the first train that arrived. If you were lucky, you might even find somewhere to sit.

For the next few years, these assumptions will hold, but during these record-breaking ridership days, it’s a good opportunity to remember what BART ridership was like before the economy tanked (or even as the economy started tanking) and what it will likely be like as again as the economy recovers.

So try to think back to 2008. BART was crowded everyday during the commute hours. I remember this time well – at one point I stopped taking BART if I could avoid it at all during commute hours because of how uncomfortable it was. I started taking a bus if that was at all an option. It started to become such a problem that BART held special meetings on the issue and talked about possible ways to deal with the capacity problem. As recently as September 2008, they started floating the idea of congestion pricing – charging more at peak hours to encourage riders to change work schedules and to ease congestion during commute hours.

But then the economy tanked, and BART’s ridership dropped along with it. Without jobs to get to, people weren’t flooding the BART system during commute hours. And it seems that most people forgot the capacity crisis that was only narrowly averted by the onset of the recession.

This crisis has not been averted entirely though. As Daniel at 21st Century Urban Solutions explains:

The overcrowding this week is not a freak occurrence; rather, it is a preview for what Bart will regularly face 10 years (or less?) down the road.  Population growth, climate change, peak oil, and traffic congestion are not simply going to go away, and until Bart/MTC can find the $10 billion that it’s going to take to build a second tube (probably in the next 50 years), Bart needs to invest in ways to maximize the efficiency of its current system through better station design, vehicle layout, parking management, transit and bicycle access, and train control.  We need to reinvest in Bart for a sustainable future.

Daniel is exactly right. The problem is that the BART Board has been so focused on geographical expansion of the system, that it has neglected the most urgent capital need – expanding transbay capacity. And these extensions, particularly BART to San Jose, are only going to exacerbate the problem. As new riders from the San Jose corridor put increasing pressure on the transbay tube and as the economy recovers, the tube and trains will reach capacity.

And who is this going to effect most? Oakland riders.

You might have noticed this week that news articles talked about riders at West Oakland having to wait for an uncrowded train, but you probably never read that about an Orinda or Pleasanton rider. Suburban riders will be able to catch a train (and probably a seat) every morning, while Oaklanders will barely squeeze in or have to pass up trains all together.

The good news is that something can be done. Ideally, BART would scrap some of its extensions and build another transbay tube. But that’s probably not going to happen, until we replace nearly every current BART Board member.

The other option to increase capacity is to get a new train set and to focus on increased train capacity. BART has been working on this – the problem is that the project is not fully funded and hasn’t seemed to be a funding priority of BART.

Well it sure sounds like Oakland’s screwed then (maybe dto510 was right after all), but there’s another hope, which might be our best one. Besides BART, there’s another excellent way to cross the Bay via transit – AC Transit’s transbay buses. I must admit that I’ve never ridden the commuter transbay buses, but I’ve heard they’re very comfortable, and they even have wi-fi. So as BART reaches capacity, AC Transit will increasingly be a place to turn to get across the Bay, unless of course you’ve enjoyed the Manhattan like conditions this week on BART.

Monday Morning Distractions – 4th of July on the Bay

This Saturday, I was lucky enough to take a mini-cruise out on the bay for 4th of July. As we moved away from the Berkeley harbor and across the bay, I remembered one of the reasons Oakland is so great, and that’s because it’s part of the larger Bay Area. Sure, there’s plenty to do in Oakland. But if it’s not in Oakland, chances are it’s in one of the cities nearby, and looked at holistically, the Bay Area is easily one of the most beautiful places in the world.

Here’s some of what I saw.

Downtown Oakland from afar.

The Oakland container cranes.

It was really bizarre to see the new and old East spans of the bridge together, especially with the large gap in the new one.

The West span looked like its usual self though.

I used to think the best way to see San Francisco was from Oakland, but now I know the best view is from the bay.

People on the boat got really excited when we passed under the Golden Gate, and I must admit it was a stunning view.

The sky was filled with clouds, sunlight, and the moon.

At night, it became a bit difficult to take photos. You can see the movement of the boat reflected in the lights.

We waited for a long time in the freezing cold for the fireworks to start. It reminded me a lot of waiting for the man to burn at Burning Man, boats gathered around like art cars, blasting music.

But they were worth the wait.

Bart to Riders: Whatever you do, don’t ride the bus (or other transit)!

As you no doubt have heard, BART’s negotiations with unions haven’t been going so well, and there’s a possibility that workers could strike as soon as next week. So BART issued a press release yesterday, explaining alternative options to its riders in the case of a strike, which makes complete sense.

What doesn’t make sense is the order in which they placed these recommendations. BART’s first two suggestions are to adjust work hours or telecommute, which is great advice if your boss will allow that. But for the rest of us, BART’s next suggestions are to carpool or to drive alternate routes that might not be as congested. Um, are they serious?

Way down at the botttom of the list, after recommending bicycling, they finally mention that there are other transit agencies in the Bay Area that serve a majority of their riders. Look, I’m all for bicycling, but I really can’t imagine that many people who take BART are traveling a short enough distance that biking would be a viable option. But for so many, other public transit agencies offer the best alternative if BART is shut down.

So why isn’t this recommendation at the top of BART’s list? I don’t think it’s because BART is evil and wants to congest our roads further and create more pollution. It’s more likely it’s because they’re terrified of losing riders to AC Transit, Caltrain, and other transit agencies that offer comparable service.

I didn’t live here at the time, but friends have told me that BART’s last strike in 1997 was when AC Transit’s transbay commuter service really took off. People switched to ACT, and many never switched back. And I can understand why – most of the transbay commuter buses are extremely comfortable and less crowded than BART. Also, there’s a much better chance that an ACT transbay bus stops within walking distance of your house, which means riders can ditch their cars and not have to pay for parking at a BART lot.

But beyond the transbay mess, there are a surprising amount of people who use BART to commute within the East Bay, and with ACT’s rapid lines, I would not be surprised if, in the case of a strike, BART riders made the switch to local ACT service and never switched back.

This is all very bad news for BART, which has been losing riders, but is it so bad that BART should essentially be discouraging its riders from riding the bus or using other public transit options? I think not. So my recommendation, if a strike happens, is to first look into other public transit options before hopping in your car.