DOCSLIB.ORG

Berkeley Mitigation Plan Chapter 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Berkeley Mitigation Plan Chapter 1 Section 3: Hazard Analysis FIRST DRAFT October 21, 2013 Hazard Analysis Table of Contents 3 Hazard Analysis ........................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Identification of Hazards..................................................................................... 5 3.1.1 Natural Hazards ......................................................................................................... 5 3.1.2 Manmade Hazards ..................................................................................................... 6 3.1.3 Public Health Impacts of Identified Hazards .............................................................. 6 3.1.4 Hazards Not Considered in the Plan .......................................................................... 7 3.2 Components of the Hazards Analysis ................................................................. 7 SECTION A: HAZARDS OF GREATEST CONCERN ............................................... 9 3.3 Earthquakes ......................................................................................................... 9 3.3.1 Historical Earthquakes ............................................................................................... 9 3.3.2 Earthquake Hazard .................................................................................................... 9 3.3.3 Exposure and Vulnerability ...................................................................................... 26 3.3.4 Earthquake Risk and Loss Estimates ........................................................................ 70 3.4 Wildland-Urban Interface Fire .......................................................................... 75 3.4.1 Historical Wildland-Urban Interface Fires ............................................................... 75 3.4.2 Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Hazard ..................................................................... 78 3.4.3 Exposure and Vulnerability ...................................................................................... 78 3.4.4 Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Risk and Loss Estimates .......................................... 87 SECTION B: HAZARDS OF CONCERN ................................................................... 88 3.5 Rainfall-Triggered Landslides .......................................................................... 88 3.5.1 Historical Rainfall-Triggered Landslides ................................................................... 88 3.5.2 Rainfall-Triggered Landslide Hazard ........................................................................ 88 3.5.3 Exposure and Vulnerability ...................................................................................... 89 3.5.4 Landslide Risk and Loss Estimates ........................................................................... 89 3.6 Floods ................................................................................................................ 90 3.6.1 Historical Floods ...................................................................................................... 90 3.6.2 Flood Hazard ............................................................................................................ 90 3.6.3 Exposure and Vulnerability ...................................................................................... 91 2014 First Draft: Berkeley Local Hazard Mitigation Plan - 1 - Section 3: Hazard Analysis FIRST DRAFT October 21, 2013 3.6.4 Flood Risk and Loss Estimates ................................................................................. 99 3.7 Tsunami........................................................................................................... 101 3.7.1 Historical Tsunamis ................................................................................................ 101 3.7.2 Tsunami Hazard ..................................................................................................... 101 3.7.3 Exposure and Vulnerability .................................................................................... 102 3.7.4 Tsunami Risk and Loss Estimates ........................................................................... 106 3.8 Climate Change ............................................................................................... 108 3.8.1 Direct and Secondary Climate Change Impacts ..................................................... 108 3.8.2 Climate Change Impacts to Natural Hazards of Concern ...................................... 112 SECTION C: ADDITIONAL HAZARDS ................................................................. 116 3.9 Hazardous Materials Release .......................................................................... 116 3.9.1 Historical Hazardous Materials Releases ............................................................... 116 3.9.2 Hazardous Materials Release Hazard .................................................................... 116 3.9.3 Exposure and Vulnerability .................................................................................... 117 3.9.4 Hazardous Materials Release Risk and Loss Estimates .......................................... 123 3.10 Terrorism......................................................................................................... 124 3.11 Hazard Analysis and Actions Summary ......................................................... 125 3.11.1 Hazard Analysis Summary ................................................................................. 125 3.11.2 Vulnerabilities and Actions Summary ............................................................... 125 2014 First Draft: Berkeley Local Hazard Mitigation Plan - 2 - Section 3: Hazard Analysis FIRST DRAFT October 21, 2013 Maps Map 3.1 Regional faults and their location with respect to Berkeley ............................... 10 Map 3.2 Modified Mercalli Intensity for Magnitude 7.3 Scenario Earthquake on the Hayward fault.................................................................................................................... 13 Map 3.3 Berkeley Seismic Hazard Planning Zones.......................................................... 15 Map 3.4 Landslide hazard for 7.1 Hayward fault earthquake scenario ............................ 18 Map 3.5 Active and potentially-active landslides in Berkeley hills (developed by Alan Kropp Associates and used with permission) ................................................................... 19 Map 3.6 Liquefaction Scenario Map ................................................................................ 22 Map 3.7 Single-Family Homes with structural and nonstructural mitigation work from 2004 -2011 ........................................................................................................................ 33 Map 3.8 Retrofitted and Unretrofitted Soft-Story Buildings ............................................ 36 Map 3.9 Retrofitted and Unretrofitted Unreinforced Masonry Buildings ........................ 38 Map 3.10 Potentially Hazardous Tilt-Up Concrete Buildings .......................................... 40 Map 3.11 Seismic Hazard Planning Zones, Gas Transmission Pipelines and Jet Fuel Line ........................................................................................................................................... 49 Map 3.12 Seismic Hazard Planning Zones and Transportation Infrastructure ................. 53 Map 3.13 Seismic Hazard Planning Zones and Critical Facilities.................................... 62 Map 3.14 Area burned by 1923 Berkeley Fire ................................................................. 77 Map 3.15 City-designated and Calfire hazardous fire zones ............................................ 80 Map 3.16 Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map.................................................................... 93 Map 3.17 Berkeley Area Watersheds .............................................................................. 95 Map 3.18 Berkeley Tsunami Inundation ........................................................................ 104 Map 3.19 Berkeley Shoreline Areas Prone to Sea Level Rise ........................................ 111 Map 3.20 Level 1 Hazardous Materials Facilities, Transportation Systems and Primary Natural Hazards .............................................................................................................. 121 2014 First Draft: Berkeley Local Hazard Mitigation Plan - 3 - Section 3: Hazard Analysis FIRST DRAFT October 21, 2013 Tables Table 3.1 Transfer Tax Rebate Program ........................................................................... 32 Table 3.2 Berkeley Soft-Story Building Status................................................................. 35 Table 3.3 Key Berkeley Utility Systems........................................................................... 42 Table 3.4 Sanitary Sewer System ..................................................................................... 45 Table 3.5 Storm Drain System .......................................................................................... 46 Table 3.6 Key Berkeley Transportation Systems ............................................................. 52 Table 3.7 Curbs, Streets and the Solano Tunnel ............................................................... 54 Table 3.8 Key Berkeley Communications Systems .......................................................... 57 Table 3.9 LifeLong Berkeley Healthcare
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Please Refrain from Wearing Scented Products (Perfume, Cologne
    SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT 300 Lakeside Drive, P. O. Box 12688, Oakland, CA 94604-2688 NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Wednesday, July 26, 2017 4:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Marian Breitbart, Michael Day, Daren Gee, Christine D. Johnson, Michael McGill, Anu Natarajan, John Post Meeting of the Bond Oversight Committee on Wednesday, July 26, 2017, at 4:00 p.m. The Meeting will be held in the 1800 Conference Room, 300 Lakeside Dr., 18th Floor, Oakland, California. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call. 2. INTRODUCTION OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS 3. INTRODUCTION OF BART STAFF 4. COMMITTEE ROLE A. Controller-Treasurer’s Office is official point of contact for all matters B. Audio recording of meetings C. Meeting Agendas/Minutes D. Annual Report writing and approval process E. Request for photos and bio for website F. Clipper Card/Travel reimbursement G. Introduce process of selecting Committee Chair and Vice Chair 5. PRESENTATION: MEASURE RR OVERALL PROGRAM 6. PRESENTATION: STATUS OF BONDS SOLD 7. Q&A WITH STAFF 8. STAFF REQUEST TO PRESENT ASSET MANAGEMENT AT NEXT MEETING 9. SETTING NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA 10. PUBLIC COMMENT Please refrain from wearing scented products (perfume, cologne, after-shave, etc.) to this meeting, as there may be people in attendance susceptible to environmental illnesses. BART provides services/accommodations upon request to persons with disabilities and individuals who are limited English proficient who wish to address BART Board matters. A request must be made within one and five days in advance of a Board or committee meeting, depending on the service requested.
    [Show full text]
  • AQ Conformity Amended PBA 2040 Supplemental Report Mar.2018
    TRANSPORTATION-AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Governments MARCH 2018 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Jake Mackenzie, Chair Dorene M. Giacopini Julie Pierce Sonoma County and Cities U.S. Department of Transportation Association of Bay Area Governments Scott Haggerty, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover Alameda County Contra Costa County Bijan Sartipi California State Alicia C. Aguirre Anne W. Halsted Transportation Agency Cities of San Mateo County San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Libby Schaaf Tom Azumbrado Oakland Mayor’s Appointee U.S. Department of Housing Nick Josefowitz and Urban Development San Francisco Mayor’s Appointee Warren Slocum San Mateo County Jeannie Bruins Jane Kim Cities of Santa Clara County City and County of San Francisco James P. Spering Solano County and Cities Damon Connolly Sam Liccardo Marin County and Cities San Jose Mayor’s Appointee Amy R. Worth Cities of Contra Costa County Dave Cortese Alfredo Pedroza Santa Clara County Napa County and Cities Carol Dutra-Vernaci Cities of Alameda County Association of Bay Area Governments Supervisor David Rabbit Supervisor David Cortese Councilmember Pradeep Gupta ABAG President Santa Clara City of South San Francisco / County of Sonoma San Mateo Supervisor Erin Hannigan Mayor Greg Scharff Solano Mayor Liz Gibbons ABAG Vice President City of Campbell / Santa Clara City of Palo Alto Representatives From Mayor Len Augustine Cities in Each County City of Vacaville
    [Show full text]
  • EMMA Official Statement
    NEW ISSUE – BOOK ENTRY ONLY RATINGS: Moody’s (2020 Bonds): Aaa Long Term Standard & Poor’s (2020C-1 Bonds): AAA Short Term Standard & Poor’s (2020C-2 Bonds): A-1+ See “Ratings” herein. In the opinion of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Bond Counsel to the District, based upon an analysis of existing laws, regulations, rulings and court decisions, and assuming, among other matters, the accuracy of certain representations and compliance with certain covenants, interest on the 2020C-1 Bonds is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. In the further opinion of Bond Counsel, interest on the 2020C-1 Bonds is not a specific preference item for purposes of the federal alternative minimum tax. Bond Counsel is also of the opinion that interest on the 2020 Bonds is exempt from State of California personal income taxes. Bond Counsel further observes that interest on the 2020C-2 Bonds is not excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes under Section 103 of the Code. Bond Counsel expresses no opinion regarding any other tax consequences related to the ownership or disposition of, or the amount, accrual or receipt of interest on, the 2020 Bonds. See “TAX MATTERS.” $700,000,000 SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS $625,005,000 $74,995,000 (ELECTION OF 2016), (ELECTION OF 2016), 2020 SERIES C-1 2020 SERIES C-2 (FEDERALLY TAXABLE) (GREEN BONDS) (GREEN BONDS) Dated: Date of Delivery Due: As shown on inside cover The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District General Obligation Bonds (Election of 2016), 2020 Series C-1 (Green Bonds) (the “2020C-1 Bonds”) and 2020 Series C-2 (Federally Taxable) (Green Bonds) (the “2020C-2 Bonds” and, together with the 2020C-1 Bonds, the “2020 Bonds”) are being issued to finance specific acquisition, construction and improvement projects for District facilities approved by the voters and to pay the costs of issuance of the 2020 Bonds.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizens' Oversight Committee Meeting 2013 – 2015 Term
    San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) Earthquake Safety Program Citizens’ Oversight Committee Meeting 2013 – 2015 Term Tuesday, August 6, 2013 4:30 pm Conference Room 1700 Kaiser Center Tower, 17th Floor 300 Lakeside Drive, Oakland, CA 94612 Meeting Number Meeting Date Meeting Time Term 4, Meeting 4 August 6, 2013 4:30 pm Attendees Members Staff Juliano Waldron Thomas Horton Matt Wrona Molly McArthur Robert Barksdale Bianca Mallory Ralph Mason Ramiro Salazar Sayed Sultan Terry Green Alternates Darlene Cummins Richard Pipkin Ching Wu Prabhat Goyal Agenda Item Action Taken Welcome & M. McArthur called the meeting to order at approximately 4:35 pm. Introductions B. Mallory noted members’ attendance. Review of M. McArthur reviewed the following administrative matter: Administrative • May 7 meeting minutes were approved and posted on the BART Matters website COC 13-15 Meeting 4.04 Minutes Page 1 of 5 San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) Earthquake Safety Program Guest Speaker M. McArthur introduced Terry Green, BART Manager of Special Terry Green Investigations and Audits. T. Green gave an overview of the role and procedures of the Auditing Department: o Since January 2009 the Internal Audit Department has performed 66 audits of the Earthquake Safety Program contracts. All of the audits have been of contractors or subcontractors. The audits were as follows: . 34 Provisional (billing) rates . 31 Final rates . 1 Construction claim o Of the 66 audits: . 41 audits of Earthquake Safety Program contractors and subcontractors . 25 audits of consultants used by Earthquake Safety as well as other BART projects o Of the 25 shared consultants: .
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
    APPENDIX A SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT FINANCIAL AND OPERATING INFORMATION OHSUSA 767685032.9 (This page intentionally left blank) OHSUSA 767685032.9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A- SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT ................................................. 1 General Description of the District .................................................................................... 1 Powers of the District......................................................................................................... 1 Administration ................................................................................................................... 1 Employees and Labor Relations ........................................................................................ 4 Litigation ............................................................................................................................ 5 THE BART SYSTEM ................................................................................................................... 5 General Description ........................................................................................................... 5 Ridership ............................................................................................................................ 8 Revenue Hours ................................................................................................................... 9 Passenger Fares .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bart Schedule Weekday Millbrae
    Bart Schedule Weekday Millbrae Iridescent Oren illiberalize, his abusages refashions comedown broadside. Dreich Darby prelect imploringly. Casey often salving tropologically when burked Ripley tenures unbecomingly and purifying her gites. The philanthropic support us on bart schedule shift will still Giamari Roshuvl, a digital marketing manager who was riding to San Francisco from Rockridge. The same number of trains will serve Pleasant Hill, BART Officials said, but more trains will serve Concord each weekday morning. Housing costs, job opportunities, and other considerations likely contribute to this trend. Molly Solomon covers housing affordability at KQED. Transbay Tube, making it one of the busiest sections of the system in terms of passenger and train traffic. Use the elevated concourse to get from BART and the bus area to the SJ platform. United States, according to the Covid Tracking Project. Bart weekday peak. The schedule shift will allow BART for a longer work window for power cable replacement in San Francisco. The still unanswered question is who would run the new system. BART is adding trains to run during peak commute times on multiple lines starting Sept. When are service advisories issued? Office to maintain public. At this point, one of the The exit gate pulls your ticket through and retains it. Oakland North assumes no liability for comments posted to the site and no endorsement is implied; commenters are solely responsible for their own content. External partners include architects EHDD, Cahill Construction and Oppenheim Lewis, project management. The Thing With Alec Baldwin, and more. In some stations, it is necessary to take two elevators or escalators to complete the trip.
    [Show full text]
  • Geoarchaeological Testing Report for the University of California, Berkeley Student Athlete High Performance Center, Alameda County, California
    Geoarchaeological Testing Report for the University of California, Berkeley Student Athlete High Performance Center, Alameda County, California Prepared for: University of California, Berkeley Capital Projects 1936 University Avenue Berkeley, CA 94704 Prepared by: William Self Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 2192 Orinda, CA 94563 (925) 253-9070 December 2008 Geoarchaeological Testing Report for the University of California, Berkeley Student Athlete High Performance Center, Alameda County, California Prepared By: David Buckley, B.A., Angela Cook, B.A., Allen Estes, Ph.D., Paul Farnsworth, Ph.D., and Nazih Fino, M.A., Submitted By: James M. Allan, Ph.D. Principal Investigator Project No. 2008-53 Report No. 2008-60 December 2008 Cover Photo: View of Memorial Stadium from parking lot, view southeast. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Description .......................................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Location............................................................................................................................1 2.0 Environmental and Cultural Setting ...........................................................................................5 2.1 Natural Setting ..............................................................................................................................5 2.1.1 Existing Environment............................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Searching for Induced Travel: Elimination of a Freeway Bottleneck and Subsequent Effects on Rail and Freeway Volumes
    Searching for Induced Travel: Elimination of a Freeway Bottleneck and Subsequent Effects on Rail and Freeway Volumes Joshua Seeherman* Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Berkeley 416E McLaughlin Hall Berkeley CA 94720-1720 Phone: 617-306-5738/Fax: 510-642-1246 Email: [email protected] Alexander Skabardonis Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Berkeley 416B McLaughlin Hall Berkeley CA 94720-1720 Phone: 510-642-9166/Fax: 510-642-1246 Email: [email protected] *corresponding author Submitted January 6, 2016 Revised May 13, 2016 Abstract The removal of a freeway bottleneck in California has allowed researchers to investigate short- term induced travel and a potential mode switch from rail transit. This particular bottleneck, a double lane drop from reduced tunnel capacity, is a unique case as alternate auto routes are quite undesirable; the only other option is to consider nearby rail transit. Freeway volumes and rail ridership were examined before and after the removal of the bottleneck to estimate the extent of induced travel. Freeway volumes during both commute periods increased 10-13%, faster than other nearby locations, and rail transit ridership between stations on either side of the pre- existing bottleneck showed modest declines despite system wide increases. Differences of means testing confirmed that many of these changes were statistically significant. Examining the magnitude of induced travel is relevant when making policy decisions for removing mature bottlenecks that involve the use of public finances. Keywords Induced travel, bottleneck, modal switch, freeway congestion, California 1. Introduction In the San Francisco Bay Area, the Caldecott Tunnel bottleneck on State Route (SR) 24 had long been a flashpoint for frustrated drivers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Warm Springs BART Station on the Value of Neighboring Residential Properties in Fremont, CA
    San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Mineta Transportation Institute Publications 5-2019 Value Capture to Fund Public Transportation: The Impact of Warm Springs BART Station on the Value of Neighboring Residential Properties in Fremont, CA Shishir Mathur San Jose State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/mti_publications Part of the Transportation Commons, Urban Studies Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Recommended Citation Shishir Mathur. "Value Capture to Fund Public Transportation: The Impact of Warm Springs BART Station on the Value of Neighboring Residential Properties in Fremont, CA" Mineta Transportation Institute Publications (2019). This Report is brought to you for free and open access by SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mineta Transportation Institute Publications by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Project 1714 May 2019 Value Capture to Fund Public Transportation: The Impact of Warm Springs BART Station on the Value of Neighboring Residential Properties in Fremont, CA Shishir Mathur, Ph.D. MINETA TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE transweb.sjsu.edu MINETA TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE MTI FOUNDER LEAD UNIVERSITY OF Hon. Norman Y. Mineta Mineta Consortium for Transportation Mobility MTI BOARD OF TRUSTEES Founded in 1991, the Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI), an organized research and training unit in partnership with the Founder, Honorable Norman Richard Anderson (Ex-Officio) Steve Heminger* (TE 2018) Dan Smith (TE 2020) Lucas College and Graduate School of Business at San José State University (SJSU), increases mobility for all by improving the safety, Mineta (Ex-Officio) President and CEO Executive Director President Secretary (ret.), US Department of Amtrak Metropolitan Transportation Capstone Financial Group, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Triennial On-Site Safety Review of Bay Area Rapid Transit District
    2010 TRIENNIAL ON-SITE SAFETY REVIEW OF BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT RAIL TRANSIT SAFETY SECTION RAIL TRANSIT AND CROSSINGS BRANCH CONSUMER PROTECTION AND SAFETY DIVISION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 August 19, 2010 Final Report Richard W. Clark, Director Consumer Protection and Safety Division 2010 TRIENNIAL ON-SITE SAFETY REVIEW BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The California Public Utilities Commission’s Rail Transit Safety Section (RTSS) conducted this system safety program review. Staff members directly responsible for conducting safety review and inspection activities are: Georgetta Gregory, Rail Transit Crossing Branch Program Manager Anton Garabetian – Senior Utilities Engineer Steve Espinal, Senior Utilities Supervisor Vincent Kwong, CPUC Representative to BART, Utilities Engineer Michael Borer, Vehicle Inspector Raed Dwairi, Project Manager, Utilities Engineer Don Filippi, Senior Transportation Operations Supervisor Thomas Govea, Signals Inspector Erik Juul, Senior Utilities Engineer John Madriaga, Track Inspector Arun Mehta, Utilities Engineer Rupa Shitole, Utilities Engineer Colleen Sullivan, Utilities Engineer Jimmy Xia, Utilities Engineer ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 1 2. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 2 3. BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BART Sustainable Communities Operations Analysis Executive Summary
    Study Funding Provided By: BART Sustainable Communities Operations Analysis Metropolitan Transportation Commission June 2013 Table of Contents Contents Executive Summary 4 1. Introduction 6 2. Existing Infrastructure and Demand Conditions and Constraints 17 3. Land Use and Projected Ridership 27 4. Alternatives Considered to Meet Future Demand 35 5. Service Plan Development 37 6. Development of Phased Service Plans 48 7. Phase 1 and 2 Service Plans 49 8. Capital Projects Triggered by Programmed Projects and Future Demand 61 9. Enhancement and Capital Projects List 62 10. Findings, Funding and Implementation 64 Appendices (separate document) A. Existing Infrastructure Conditions B. Top 20 Ridership Increases C. Alternative Service Strategies D. Key Performance Indicators E. Cursory Title VI Analysis Arup June 2013 3 Executive Summary Background – The Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail Metro Core and Metro Commute Strategy – Plan Bay The overall service design objective – and the guiding system has provided 40 years of frequent and fast transit Area allocates growth to locally-identified areas near principles for the development of the scenarios and service service. Over the last 20 years, BART has increased service transit, and reinforces development within the Bay Area’s plans – seeks to provide a high quality transit service by and reliability, fulfilling its original mandate to help shape central cities. In response, BART ridership increases more maximizing service (trains per hour), while minimizing the growth and development in the Bay Area and reduce the dramatically in the Bay Area core, leading to changes in amount of train miles incurred (cars per train). By striking region’s dependence on the automobile.
    [Show full text]
  • BART FY15-FY24 Short Range Transit Plan and Capital Improvement Program
    BART FY15-FY24 Short Range Transit Plan and Capital Improvement Program October 2014 BART FY15-FY24 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Federal transportation statutes require that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), in partnership with state and local agencies, develop and periodically update a long-range Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that implements the RTP by programming federal funds to transportation projects contained in the RTP. To effectively execute these planning and programming responsibilities, MTC requires that each transit operator in its region that receives federal funding through the TIP prepare, adopt, and submit to MTC a Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) that includes a Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The preparation of this report has been funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) through section 5303 of the Federal Transit Act. The contents of this SRTP reflect the views of San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District and not necessarily those of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) or MTC. The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District is solely responsible for the accuracy of the information presented in this SRTP. i Table of Contents Page 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 2 Overview of the BART System .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]