DOCSLIB.ORG

City of Sacramento

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
City of Sacramento CITY OF SACRAMENTO LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT LAND USE POLICIES AND GUIDELINES April 2005 Prepared by Planning Division Long Range Planning Section Development Services Department Todd Leon, Project Manager Jim McDonald AICP, Senior Planner Stacia Cosgrove, Associate Planner Christopher Jordan, Student Assistant Nathan Stephens, Student Assistant http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/planning/plngserv/lngrng/policies.htm TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................I I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1 II. CITY OF SACRAMENTO GENERAL PLAN...........................................................................5 SECTION 1: POLICIES........................................................................................................7 SECTION 2: RESIDENTIAL LAND USE ELEMENT.........................................................12 SECTION 4: COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY LAND USE ELEMENT ...............................15 SECTION 5: CIRCULATION ELEMENT............................................................................20 III. REGIONAL TRANSIT PLANS .............................................................................................25 A. REGIONAL TRANSIT MASTER PLAN (1993) ............................................................26 B. REGIONAL TRANSIT DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR BUS AND LIGHT RAIL FACILITIES...............................................................................................................33 IV. POLICIES AND PLANS BY COMMUNITY PLAN AREAS .................................................39 A. AIRPORT MEADOWVIEW............................................................................................40 B. ARDEN-ARCADE..........................................................................................................42 C. CENTRAL CITY.............................................................................................................44 COMMUNITY PLAN .................................................................................................44 RICHARDS BOULEVARD AND SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAIL YARDS ...................46 R STREET CORRIDOR COMMUNITY PLAN ..........................................................49 D. EAST BROADWAY.......................................................................................................55 SOUTH 65TH STREET AREA PLAN.........................................................................55 E. EAST SACRAMENTO...................................................................................................58 THE 65TH STREET-UNIVERSITY TRANSIT VILLAGE PLAN ...............................58 F. LAND PARK ..................................................................................................................61 G. NORTH NATOMAS.......................................................................................................62 COMMUNITY PLAN .................................................................................................62 H. NORTH SACRAMENTO ...............................................................................................66 COMMUNITY PLAN .................................................................................................66 North Sacramento Special Planning Districts and Light Rail Station Land Use Study ....................................................................66 SWANSTON STATION.............................................................................................69 I. POCKET..........................................................................................................................71 J. SOUTH NATOMAS........................................................................................................72 COMMUNITY PLAN .................................................................................................72 K. SOUTH SACRAMENTO................................................................................................74 COMMUNITY PLAN .................................................................................................74 V. TRANSIT PLAN ZONING .....................................................................................................77 A. TRANSIT OVERLAY ZONE ..........................................................................................78 B. LIGHT TRANSIT STATION ORDINANCE ....................................................................78 VI. APPENDIX ...........................................................................................................................81 APPENDIX A: LIST OF WEBSITES..................................................................................83 APPENDIX B: TRANSIT OVERLAY ZONE........................................................................84 APPENDIX C: LIGHT RAIL STATION ORDINANCE........................................................97 APPENDIX D: TRANSIT FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ...............................................105 APPENDIX E: STATION AREA PLAN SUMMARY ........................................................112 APPENDIX F: OTHER RESOURCE MATERIALS..........................................................113 CITY OF SACRAMENTO LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT LAND USE POLICIES AND GUIDELINES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose of Document The purpose of the Light Rail Transit Land Use Policies and Guidelines document is to provide, in one document, a comprehensive collection of planning goals, policies, and recommendations prepared by the City of Sacramento, Regional Transit (RT) and public design workshops. The result is a single location for a great deal of good planning work that is accessible and more useful. Decision makers, citizens, and public agency staff will use this information to develop more effective transit oriented developments. The workbook identifies existing LRT land use policies, in various levels of detail, for the City of Sacramento. Some areas contain detailed community plan policies and design workshop recommendations, while others refer only to the general plan. This document also identifies those areas of the City that have the need for additional policy development at the community and station specific levels. Contents The Light Rail Transit Land Use Policies and Guidelines document is organized into five major sections: • General Plan Policies • Regional Transit Policies (which also apply Citywide) • Community/Station Area Plans and Policies • Transit Zoning • Appendix GENERAL PLAN POLICIES Sacramento's General Plan is a long-range policy guide for physical, economic, and environmental growth and renewal of the city. It is comprised of goals, policies, programs and actions that acts as the principle tool for evaluating public and private building projects and municipal service improvements, including light rail facilities. Conformance of projects and improvements with the General Plan is a major step toward their approval. While each of the General Plan’s goals and policies are directly or indirectly supportive of transit, key goals and policies have been highlighted for ease and reference in the Light Rail Transit Land Use Policies and Guidelines. The General Plan includes many polices that guides the type of development the City envisions near light rail stations. The General Plan Goals include: • Promote Transit Oriented Development (TOD) within ¼ mile of existing and future light rail transit (LRT) stations. (page 4-12) i • Promote the development of employee intensive uses in selected locations where such uses would encourage Light Rail Transit ridership, promote planned housing opportunities; and offer incentives for reuse. (page 4-21) • Provide all citizens in all communities of the City with access to a transportation network that serves both the City and region, either by personal vehicle or transit. Make a special effort to maximize alternatives to single occupant vehicle use, such as public transit. (page 5-1) The General Plan Policies include: • It is the policy of the City to promote an efficient, safe, and balanced transportation system. (page 1-40) • Provide a variety of transportation choices for people to bike, walk, take transit or drive. (page 1-42) • Support land use, transportation management, infrastructure and environmental planning programs that reduce vehicle emissions and improve air quality. (page 1-42) • Actively support and encourage mixed use commercial, office, and residential development in identified areas of opportunity. (page 4-15) • Support employee intensive uses where appropriate along transportation corridors, adjacent to Light Rail stations, within selected mixed-use areas, and where community plan and redevelopment goals would be implemented. (page 4-21) • Development shall meet the target average density as defined by the applicable General Plan land use category to otherwise increase and maximize potential transit ridership within one quarter mile radius of existing and future light rail stations. (page 5-25) • Discourage low density, low employment intensity, and auto related uses within one-quarter mile of existing and future light rail stations that have low transit compatibility. (page 5- 25) • Projects located within ¼ mile of existing and planned light rail transit stations should provide direct pedestrian and bicycle access to the station area, to the extent feasible. (page 5-25) • Maximum
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Travel Characteristics of Transit-Oriented Development in California
    Travel Characteristics of Transit-Oriented Development in California Hollie M. Lund, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Robert Cervero, Ph.D. Professor of City and Regional Planning University of California at Berkeley Richard W. Willson, Ph.D., AICP Professor of Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Final Report January 2004 Funded by Caltrans Transportation Grant—“Statewide Planning Studies”—FTA Section 5313 (b) Travel Characteristics of TOD in California Acknowledgements This study was a collaborative effort by a team of researchers, practitioners and graduate students. We would like to thank all members involved for their efforts and suggestions. Project Team Members: Hollie M. Lund, Principle Investigator (California State Polytechnic University, Pomona) Robert Cervero, Research Collaborator (University of California at Berkeley) Richard W. Willson, Research Collaborator (California State Polytechnic University, Pomona) Marian Lee-Skowronek, Project Manager (San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit) Anthony Foster, Research Associate David Levitan, Research Associate Sally Librera, Research Associate Jody Littlehales, Research Associate Technical Advisory Committee Members: Emmanuel Mekwunye, State of California Department of Transportation, District 4 Val Menotti, San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit, Planning Department Jeff Ordway, San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit, Real Estate Department Chuck Purvis, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Doug Sibley, State of California Department of Transportation, District 4 Research Firms: Corey, Canapary & Galanis, San Francisco, California MARI Hispanic Field Services, Santa Ana, California Taylor Research, San Diego, California i Travel Characteristics of TOD in California ii Travel Characteristics of TOD in California Executive Summary Rapid growth in the urbanized areas of California presents many transportation and land use challenges for local and regional policy makers.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G-1: Frameworks for the 2016 MTP/SCS Update Process
    Appendix G-1: Frameworks for the 2016 MTP/SCS Update Process Table of Contents 1) Schedule of Board Actions Leading to Final Plan Adoption ………………………………….. 2 2) Policy Framework for the MTP/SCS Update Process ………………………………………… 3 3) MTP/SCS Approach to Scenario Development ………………………………………………… 27 4) Framework for a Draft Preferred Scenario ……………………………………………………… 30 5) Endorse 2016 Draft Preferred Scenario …………………………………………………………. 53 Appendix G-1 Draft 8/19 Page 1 2016 MTP/SCS Update: Schedule of Board Actions Leading to Final Plan Adoption Board Action Date of Action Contents/Direction Framework 1.0: Adopted December 2013 • Set implementation-focused theme for plan update with Policy Framework five policy themes: transportation funding, investment strategy, investment timing, land use forecast, plan effects. • Set region-level growth projections of population, employment and housing for the plan horizon year (2036). • Set overall schedule for the plan update. Framework 1.5: Adopted March 2014 • Set parameters for three regional land use and Scenarios transportation scenarios for use in public workshops and Development plan development. Framework • Initiated phasing analysis of transportation investments in current plan. • Initiated analysis of different levels and types of transportation revenue sources. • Set schedule for creation of Framework 2.0. Framework 2.0: Targeted for November or • Sets guidelines, task and process for developing a draft December 2014 adoption Draft Preferred preferred scenario (land use forecast, revenue forecast, Scenario project list, performance outcomes). Framework • Sets a minimum of six weeks for review and vetting of a preliminary draft preferred scenario. Framework 3.0: Targeted for April 2015 • Sets details of Draft Preferred Scenario (for years 2020, Draft Preferred 2035, and 2036) for use in development of Draft Plan and Scenario EIR: o Land use forecast o Revenue Forecast o Budget and Project List o Performance Outcomes Draft Plan (2016 Targeted for September 2015 • Release Draft 2016 MTP/SCS for public comment.
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2011-2012 Capital Budget Represents the One Year Capital Spending Plan for RT
    Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Budget Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................ 1 General Manager/CEO Budget Message ........................................... 3 Board of Directors Board of Directors .................................................................................6 Budget Adoption Resolutions................................................................7 Budget Presentation Award......................................................................8 Executive Management Team ............................................................. 9 Organizational Structure ................................................................... 10 District Overview District Profile ......................................................................................11 Service Area Map................................................................................15 Strategic Plan......................................................................................17 Long-Term Financial Policies ..............................................................19 Budget Process...................................................................................27 Voting System .....................................................................................29 Trends.................................................................................................31 Peer Comparison ................................................................................34
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION August 16, 2017 Advice Letter 5042-E Erik Jacobson Director, Regulatory Relations Pacific Gas An
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3298 August 16, 2017 Advice Letter 5042-E Erik Jacobson Director, Regulatory Relations Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Mail Code B10C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 SUBJECT: Encroachment Agreement with Sacramento Regional Transit District Request for Approval Under Section 851 and General Order 173 Dear Mr. Jacobson: Advice Letter 5042-E is effective as of August 10, 2017, per Resolution E-4856 Ordering Paragraph. Sincerely, Edward Randolph Director, Energy Division Erik Jacobson Pacific Gas and Electric Company Director 77 Beale St., Mail Code B10C Regulatory Relations P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 Fax: 415-973-1448 March 30, 2017 Advice 5042-E (Pacific Gas and Electric Company ID U 39 E) Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Subject: Encroachment Agreement with Sacramento Regional Transit District – Request for Approval Under Section 851 and General Order 173 Purpose Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) requests approval under Public Utilities Code Section 851 (Section 851) and General Order 173 to grant an encroachment agreement (Agreement) to the Sacramento Regional Transit District, a Public Corporation (RT). The Agreement permits the encroachment of a light rail system and passenger station platform (Improvements) within PG&E’s Easement Area (PG&E Easement). A copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as Attachment 1. PG&E has inspected the encroachment agreement and has determined that granting the encroachment will not interfere with PG&E’s operations or its ability to provide utility services to its customers.
    [Show full text]
  • Sac County Folsom Blvd Butterfi
    Applicant: Sacramento County Department of Transportation Project: Butterfield Way @ Folsom Blvd Intersection Bike Lanes P. PROJECT APPLICATION Project Title Butterfield Way @ Folsom Blvd Intersection Bike Lanes SACOG ID number (if available) 30433 PPNO and/or EA number (if applicable) N/A Federal ID number (if applicable) N/A Responsible Project Manager/Contact Name: Ron Vicari II, P.E. Position: Principle Civil Engineer Address: 906 G Street, Suite 510, Sacramento CA 95814 Phone: (916) 874-5164 desk, (916) 591-2257 cell E-mail: [email protected] Co-sponsor/Partner Agencies N/A Project Location In Rosemont at the intersection of Butterfield (Also attach a map) Way and Folsom Boulevard adjacent to the Butterfield light rail station and the Franchise Tax Board. (See Context Map) Project Scope/ Description (250 word limit) Modify the intersection at Butterfield and Folsom to eliminate the barrier presented by a high voltage steel power pole between Folsom Blvd and the light rail right-of-way and extend the bike lanes to the crosswalks and stop bars on Folsom Blvd. The proposed modification will reconfigure the traffic lanes and medians to accommodate bike lanes on the Folsom Blvd approaches and departures to the intersection with Butterfield within existing right-of-way. This can be accomplished by removing one of the two westbound left turn lanes on Folsom Blvd, increasing the length of the remaining left turn lane, and optimizing the signal timing for the improved intersection geometry. Project Schedule (estimated month and year): 1. Start environmental/preliminary engineering 1. Environmental process is underway, 2. Final ED approved - Start preliminary engineering is complete engineering/design 2.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Elk Grove Short Range Transit Plan
    CITY OF ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 Prepared by: Sacramento Area Council of Governments Prepared For: City of Elk Grove ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Prepared by: Sacramento Area Council of City of Elk Grove Governments 1415 L Street, Suite RAQUEL CHAVARRIA, TRANSIT PLANNER 300 EDWARD COVIELLO, TRANSIT PLANNER Sacramento, CA 95814 JEAN C. FOLETTA, TRANSIT MANAGER Tel: 916.321.9000 Fax: 916.321.9551 BETH MARASIGAN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT www.sacog.org KARA REDDIG, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER RICHARD SHEPARD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Prepared for: City of Elk Grove Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) 8401 Laguna Palms Way SHARON SPROWLS, SENIOR PROGRAM SPECIALIST (PROJECT MANAGER) Elk Grove, CA 95758 LAURA BELL, ASSISTANT RESEARCH ANALYST VICTORIA CACCIATORE, PLANNING ANALYST RENÉE DEVERE-OKI, SENIOR PLANNER TINA GLOVER, ASSOCIATE RESEARCH ANALYST GAYLE GREENE, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT III CLINT HOLTZEN, ASSISTANT PLANNER AMY MARTIN, TRANSIT PLANNING INTERN CHRISTINE O’ROURKE, ASSISTANT PLANNER GARY TAYLOR, SENIOR PLANNER BARBARA VAUGHANBECHTOLD, ASSOCIATE PLANNER THIS SRTP WAS COMPLETED AS PROJECT #14-003-17 OF THE SACOG OVERALL WORK PROGRAM (OWP) WITH GENEROUS FUNDING PROVIDED BY CALTRANS THROUGH THE STATEWIDE OR URBAN TRANSIT PLANNING STUDIES GRANT PROGRAM. City of Elk Grove Short Range Transit Plan Page i ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ES-1 Chapter 1—Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • FY2021/22 Proposed Budget
    DARRELL STEINBERG CITY OF SACRAMENTO FACTS CITY OF SACRAMENTO Mayor The City of Sacramento was founded in 1849 and 2022 ANGELIQUE ASHBY CITY BUDGET | FISCAL SACRAMENTO OF YEAR | PROPOSED 2021-2022 Mayor Pro Tempore, District 1 is the oldest incorporated city in California. Proposed SEAN LOLOEE In 1920, city voters adopted a Charter (municipal Councilmember, District 2 constitution) and a City Council/City Manager form 2021 Budget of government. JEFF HARRIS Councilmember, District 3 The City is divided into eight districts. KATIE VALENZUELA Councilmember, District 4 Elected members of the City Council serve a four- year term. JAY SCHENIRER Vice Mayor, District 5 The Mayor is elected by all voters in the City. In ERIC GUERRA 2002, voters approved a measure for the Mayor Councilmember, District 6 to serve full-time. All other Councilmembers are elected by district and serve part-time. RICK JENNINGS, II Councilmember, District 7 The Mayor and other Councilmembers have an MAI VANG equal vote in all matters. Councilmember, District 8 The City of Sacramento currently encompasses approximately 100 square miles. The current estimated population is 510,931. CityofSacramento.org PROPOSED CITY OF SACRAMENTO FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 BUDGET DARRELL STEINBERG Mayor ANGELIQUE ASHBY JAY SCHENIRER Mayor Pro Tempore, District 1 Vice Mayor, District 5 SEAN LOLOEE ERIC GUERRA Councilmember, District 2 Councilmember, District 6 JEFF HARRIS RICK JENNINGS, II Councilmember, District 3 Councilmember, District 7 KATIE VALENZUELA MAI VANG Councilmember, District 4 Councilmember,
    [Show full text]
  • Ridership Report (October 2019)
    Ridership Report (October 2019) Year to Date Summary Category FY20 YTD FY19YTD Difference % Change Trailing 12 Month Trend Bus 3,518,921 3,415,852 103,069 3.0% 11,500,000 Light Rail 3,848,176 3,641,112 207,064 5.7% Rail Bus System Total 7,367,097 7,056,964 310,133 4.4% 11,000,000 10,500,000 Current Month Summary 10,000,000 Category October 2019 October 2018 Difference % Change Bus 1,059,668 1,014,352 45,316 4.5% 9,500,000 Light Rail 1,063,740 1,025,613 38,127 3.7% System Total 2,123,408 2,039,965 83,443 4.1% 9,000,000 Daily Summary Category October 2019 October 2018 Difference % Change Bus (M-F) 41,415 40,275 1,140 2.8% Bus (Sat) 15,390 13,266 2,124 16.0% Bus (Sun) 10,371 7,915 2,456 31.0% October Ridership by Mode Light Rail (M-F) 40,939 40,510 429 1.1% 6% Light Rail (Sat) 17,127 13,500 3,627 26.9% Light Rail Light Rail (Sun) 12,229 9,500 2,729 28.7% Fixed Route 48% Other Services E-Tran Ridership Summary (E-Van included) 46% Category Current Year Prior Year Difference % Change E-Tran (YTD) 280,319 266,440 13,879 5.2% E-Tran (Monthly) 84,775 81,648 3,127 3.8% Other services include E-Tran, Folsom, SmaRT Ride, CBS and Special Services E-Tran (Weekday) 3,560 3,426 134 3.9% Route Level Ridership Comparison (Bus) Weelday Route Comparison Saturday Route Comparison Route Oct 2019 Oct 2018 Difference % Change Route Oct 2019 Oct 2018 Difference % Change 1 2,067 2,190 (124) -6% 1 768 777 (9) -1% 11 972 715 257 36% 11 447 282 165 59% 13 678 315 362 115% 13 426 - 426 15 795 1,215 (420) -35% 15 381 558 (176) -32% 19 423 658 (234) -36% 19 209 271
    [Show full text]
  • Rider Alert Service Changes 6/17/19 September 8, 2019 Route Changes Route Changes Route Changes Route Changes
    Updated Changes take effect on Rider Alert Service Changes 6/17/19 September 8, 2019 Route Changes Route Changes Route Changes Route Changes Improve evening frequency and reduce early morning Combine with Route 22 and extend north and west in Shift trips beginning from Arden/Del Paso station at Combine Routes 30 and Route 38. Both routes would frequency. Add new trips from Sunrise Mall at 6:29, 6:59, Natomas. Discontinue part of existing route through 9:45 and 10:45 p.m. later approximately 5 minutes for use J/L Street from Sacramento Valley Station to 39th and 7:29 p.m. and from Watt/I-80 at 7:04, 7:34, 8:04, and Natomas. Improve headways to 45 minutes. Add train transfers. Adjust schedules to maintain more even Street. Route 30 would continue to CSUS as it does 8:34 p.m. Eliminate trips from Sunrise Mall at 5:14 and Saturday/Sunday service with 45 minute frequency from headways and passenger loads. Add outbound trips today. On weekdays, each route would have 30 minute 1 5:44 a.m. and from Watt/I-80 at 5:49 and 6:19 a.m. 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Extend north on Truxel Road, west from approximately 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. to help with base frequency. From downtown to 39th Street, 23 Eliminate weekend trips from Watt/I-80 at 5:06, 5:36, and on Del Paso Road to El Centro Rd. From Arden/Del Paso heavy passenger loads from Arden/Del Paso to Watt weekday customers would be able to catch either 6:06 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • CITY of ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 Prepared By: Sacramento Area Council of Governments
    CITY OF ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 Prepared by: Sacramento Area Council of Governments Prepared For: City of Elk Grove ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Prepared by: Sacramento Area Council of City of Elk Grove Governments 1415 L Street, Suite RAQUEL CHAVARRIA, TRANSIT PLANNER 300 EDWARD COVIELLO, TRANSIT PLANNER Sacramento, CA 95814 JEAN C. FOLETTA, TRANSIT MANAGER Tel: 916.321.9000 Fax: 916.321.9551 BETH MARASIGAN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT www.sacog.org KARA REDDIG, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER RICHARD SHEPARD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Prepared for: City of Elk Grove Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) 8401 Laguna Palms Way SHARON SPROWLS, SENIOR PROGRAM SPECIALIST (PROJECT MANAGER) Elk Grove, CA 95758 LAURA BELL, ASSISTANT RESEARCH ANALYST VICTORIA CACCIATORE, PLANNING ANALYST RENÉE DEVERE-OKI, SENIOR PLANNER TINA GLOVER, ASSOCIATE RESEARCH ANALYST GAYLE GREENE, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT III CLINT HOLTZEN, ASSISTANT PLANNER AMY MARTIN, TRANSIT PLANNING INTERN CHRISTINE O’ROURKE, ASSISTANT PLANNER GARY TAYLOR, SENIOR PLANNER BARBARA VAUGHANBECHTOLD, ASSOCIATE PLANNER THIS SRTP WAS COMPLETED AS PROJECT #14-003-17 OF THE SACOG OVERALL WORK PROGRAM (OWP) WITH GENEROUS FUNDING PROVIDED BY CALTRANS THROUGH THE STATEWIDE OR URBAN TRANSIT PLANNING STUDIES GRANT PROGRAM. City of Elk Grove Short Range Transit Plan Page i ELK GROVE SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2014-2020 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ES-1 Chapter 1—Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • Handout 1 Item #15-4-3
    Handout 1 Item #15-4-3 Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan Update Since the Master Plan was sent to the Committee, staff received additional feedback from the City of Roseville, Sacramento Regional Transit District, and Caltrans District 3. Staff has incorporated this feedback into the attached changes. These attachments, as described below, include three additional projects; consolidation of Caltrans District 3 projects into the multi-agency project lists for each of the six counties, including identification of project co-sponsors; consolidation of Sacramento Regional Transit District projects into City and County of Sacramento project lists; and an additional map. • Exhibit A replaces page two of the City of Roseville’s project list. Two new projects have been added (highlighted) • Exhibit B combines the El Dorado County Multi-Agency and Caltrans District 3 project lists into one El Dorado County: Multi-Agency List. • Exhibit C combines the Placer County Multi-Agency and Caltrans District 3 project lists into one Placer County: Multi-Agency List. • Exhibit D replaces page 5 of the City of Sacramento’s project list to incorporate projects previously listed under Sacramento Regional Transit District (highlighted). • Exhibit E replaces page 13 of Sacramento County’s project list to incorporate projects previously listed under Sacramento Regional Transit District (highlighted). • Exhibit F combines the Sacramento County Multi-Agency and Caltrans District 3 project lists into one Sacramento County: Multi-Agency List. • Exhibit G combines the Sutter County Multi-Agency and Caltrans District 3 project lists into one Sutter County: Multi-Agency List. • Exhibit H combines the Yolo County Multi-Agency and Caltrans District 3 project lists into one Yolo County: Multi-Agency List.
    [Show full text]
  • Transitrenewal Draft Report
    TransitRenewal Draft Report Prepared by: Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................. 3 2. RT Market Analysis .................................................. 4 3. Service Analysis ...................................................... 24 4. TransitRenewal Performance Measures ............... 67 5. Public Outreach ...................................................... 73 6. Service Recommendations .................................... 88 Transit Renewal 2010‐2017, Draft Report 1. Introduction The 2011‐2012 Sacramento Regional Transit Comprehensive Operational Analysis, commonly known as “TransitRenewal”, includes a review of existing market conditions and transit service and aims to position the RT network to sustainably meet future transit demand within the service area. Sustainability is the method of using a resource without depleting or gdamagin it for future use. Sustainable transit planning focuses on meeting transit needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet such needs1. TransitRenewal responds to changing economic circumstances and RT’s new financial realities. In 2010, RT implemented substantial service reductions which included discontinuing several bus routes, reducing service levels, and reducing spans. TransitRenewal responds to RT’s plan to regain previous FY 2010 service levels and intends to identify core areas of the RT system where investment will have a maximum benefit, and will guide RT to a more financially sustainable future.
    [Show full text]