Assembly Speaker Pro Tem Kevin Mullin of San Mateo announced AB378, a “placeholder bill” with the goal of relieving congestion on the 101 corridor. Â While the text of the bill wasn’t posted yet, Mullin’s staff said that the bill was a placeholder that could encompass policies, governance structures, and funding mechanisms to achieve the goal of the bills. Â Mullin expects that it will take more than one legislative session to flesh out the details of a bill to achieve the goals.
From a broader perspective, there is currently no entity with the mission to monitor and improve drivealone mode share on the Peninsula’s North/South corridor. Â Caltrain has a goal to carry more passengers; but if driving on the Caltrain corridor increases at a faster rate than train ridership, and transit mode share falls on the corridor, this would not be Caltrain’s goal or responsibility. Â This bill could potentially create an entity that could own that goal.
There are a number of specific gaps in the corridor’s policies that a state law could help fill.  Apparently (corrections welcome in comments), the region’s public transit services aren’t authorized to provide multi-county express bus service, leaving a large gap in service that is currently filled by private commuter buses run by leading Silicon Valley corporations; and leaving workers with smaller employers slogging through traffic. Caltrain lacks stable funding; a bill could create a district to raise a dedicated funding source.  There are other policies that would require legislative action; for example making it legally possible to implement TransForm’s proposal for optimized high occupancy toll lanes which would convert travel lanes to toll lanes and use funding to reduce driving.
There are plenty of opportunities for congestion relief – and beyond that, reduction in vehicle miles travelled and greenhouse gas emissions – on the corridor. Â Hopefully the bill can be used to to address these goals.
Apparently (corrections welcome in comments), the region’s public transit services aren’t authorized to provide multi-county express bus service
Only if you don’t count Dumbarton Express lines DB and DB1 (funded by AC Transit, BART, SamTrans, Union City Transit, and VTA), and AC Transit Line U (funding a bit mysterious, but at least partially subsidized by Stanford).
“There is currently no entity with the mission to monitor and improve drivealone mode share on the Peninsula’s North/South corridor. ”
Only if you don’t count VTA and the San Mateo CMA (http://publicworks.smcgov.org/transportation-planning). Though one might argue their purpose seems to be to increase drivealone mode share….
DB took a complex one-off partnership to create. It would be ideal to make it easier to have cross-county 101 express buses.
The Bay Area Council urged Assemblyman Mullin to introduce this bill, and is grateful that he is taking a leadership position on 101. We co-convene an employer coalition in support of next-generation Caltrain, but on Highway 101 there is no clear agency leadership (many responsible agencies, but no clear and forceful owner/leader for the multi-county corridor). The intent of the bill, as stated in its language, is to enable and facilitate a coordinated, multi-county infrastructure/operational strategy to bring commute relief to 101.
[…] CA Assemblymember’s Bill Could Make an Agency Responsible for Reducing Car Traffic on 101 (GC) […]
Mullen mentions that the traffic congestion is leading to: “serious overcrowding on Caltrain.â€
This is due more to Caltrain NOT running adequate service and trains that are too short.
Is this bill going to be about cars, cars, cars, and freeway expansion or will it address the serious underfunding of Caltrain?
Does anyone know how much the employee/rider pays to ride on the private employee commuter (aka Google) buses? Or are they an employee benefit provided by the employer?
“Is this bill going to be about cars, cars, cars, and freeway expansion or will it address the serious underfunding of Caltrain?”
I’m a skeptic, but if this bill actually passes, this is what I see as likely happening, in rough order of financial expenditure:
– Most of the money goes to more lanes on 101, including toll lanes for those who are above sitting in traffic.
– Give Caltrain enough money to run a train or two more during commute peaks
– Give SamTrans some money so they can pretend they’re implementing BRT along El Camino.
– Throw a few bucks at VTA so they can run a few express buses to/from San Francisco that no one will ride.
“Does anyone know how much the employee/rider pays to ride on the private employee commuter (aka Google) buses?”
Typically, it’s free, but often contract employees (who make up a larger percentage of the workforces at these company than many realize) have to pay for use.
If VTA or Sam Trans have money for operating express bus, it is better to spend on Caltrain for more frequency and more shuttles from the Caltrain Station. 101 express bus cannot compete with corporate shuttle and Caltrain.