DOCSLIB.ORG

INTERREGIONAL MULTI-MODAL COMMUTE TRIP PLANNING STUDY FINAL REPORT June 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
INTERREGIONAL MULTI-MODAL COMMUTE TRIP PLANNING STUDY FINAL REPORT June 2013 SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS INTERREGIONAL MULTI-MODAL COMMUTE TRIP PLANNING STUDY FINAL REPORT June 2013 MOVINGFORWARDTHINKINGTM INTERREGIONAL MULTI-MODAL COMMUTE TRIP PLANNING STUDY FINAL REPORT Prepared For: San Joaquin Council of Governments 555 E. Weber Ave. Stockton, CA 95202 209.235.0600 Prepared By: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 428 J Street, Suite 500 Sacramento, California 95814 916.226.2190 Project Manager: David Reinke Project Principal: Jim Damkowitch Project No. 13101 June 2013 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ........................................................................... 1 1.2 REGIONAL COMMUTE CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................. 3 1.3 CURRENT TRIP PLANNING INFORMATION SOURCES .............................................. 5 1.4 DESIRED FEATURES OF AN INTERREGIONAL MULTIMODAL TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEM ................................................................................ 8 1.5 GETTING FROM HERE TO THERE: ALTERNATIVES ................................................. 10 1.6 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 13 Regional Profile ..........................................................................................................15 2.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................... 15 2.2 SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................... 15 2.3 EXISTING COMMUTE SERVICES ............................................................................ 17 2.4 COMMUTE PATTERNS .......................................................................................... 21 2.5 LOCAL AND NEIGHBORING TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS .......................... 29 2.6 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 31 Literature Review & Peer Case Studies ........................................................................33 3.1 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................ 33 3.2 CASE STUDIES ...................................................................................................... 35 3.3 FINDINGS ............................................................................................................. 36 Survey Results ............................................................................................................39 4.1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................... 39 4.2 ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS ............................................................................... 39 4.3 COMMUTE MODE ................................................................................................ 41 4.4 SYSTEM ACCESS PREFERENCE .............................................................................. 43 4.5 PREFERRED TRIP PLANNING TOOL FEATURES ....................................................... 44 4.6 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 46 Needs Assessment ......................................................................................................47 5.1 CURRENT TRIP PLANNING INFORMATION SOURCES ............................................ 47 5.2 NEEDS ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................ 49 5.3 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 53 Systems Alternatives & Evaluation ..............................................................................55 6.1 MMTP FEATURES ................................................................................................. 55 6.2 IMPLEMENTATION ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................ 67 6.3 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 71 Summary and Recommendations ...............................................................................73 Interregional Multimodal Commute Trip Planning Study | i LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. Study Approach ............................................................................................. 2 Figure 1-2. Work trip destinations for commuters who work outside their county of residence ...................................................................................................... 3 Figure 1-3. Commute mode shares by work destination ................................................. 4 Figure 1-4. Example: Google Maps transit trip plan, Stockton to Lodi ............................. 5 Figure 1-5. Commute Connection screen, transit alternative from Stockton to Lodi ....... 6 Figure 1-6. User screen example: top-level comparison of mode alternatives ................ 8 Figure 1-7. User screen example: top-level comparison of vanpool alternatives ............. 9 Figure 1-8. User screen example: detailed comparison of selected vanpool alternatives ................................................................................................ 10 Figure 2-1. Three-County Region Transit Services ......................................................... 18 Figure 2-2. Inter-county commuting out of the three-county region ............................ 24 Figure 2-3. Inter-county commuting within the three-county region ............................ 25 Figure 2-4. San Joaquin County inter-city commutes .................................................... 26 Figure 2-5. Stanislaus County inter-city commutes ................................................... 27 Figure 2-6. Merced County inter-city commutes ...................................................... 28 Figure 4-1. County of Residence .................................................................................... 40 Figure 4-2. County of Work/School ............................................................................... 40 Figure 4-4. Previous Experience with Trip Planning Tools ............................................. 44 Table 4-3. Preferred MMTP System Elements ............................................................... 45 Figure 5-1. Example: Google Maps transit trip plan, Stockton to Lodi ........................... 47 Figure 5-2. Commute Connection screen, transit alternative from Stockton to Lodi..... 48 Figure 6-1. Vanpool stakeholders and key success factors ............................................ 59 Figure 6-2. User screen example: top-level comparison of mode alternatives .............. 64 Figure 6-3. User screen example: top-level comparison of vanpool alternatives .......... 64 Figure 6-4. User screen example: detailed comparison of selected vanpool alternatives ................................................................................................ 65 Figure 6-5. Detailed list of desired features, priorities, and sources ............................. 66 Figure 6-6. Detailed features, estimated implementation difficulty and cost for each system alternative ...................................................................................... 68 ii | San Joaquin Council of Governments Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1. Summary assessment of system alternatives by type of feature .................. 12 Table 2-1. Summary socioeconomic and work travel statistics for Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus counties .......................................................... 16 Table 2-2. Transit providers for the three-county area .................................................. 17 Table 2-3. Interurban transit routes in three-county area ............................................. 19 Table 2-4. Interregional commuting from/to Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus counties ...................................................................................................... 21 Table 2-5. Commute modes from Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus counties for i nter-county commutes ............................................................................... 21 Table 2-6. Commute modes from Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus counties to places outside the three-county region ..................................................... 22 Table 2-7. Commute modes for intercity commutes within the three-county region .... 23 Table 2-1. Case study regions ........................................................................................ 36 Table 4-1. Preferred Commute Modes .......................................................................... 41 Table 4-2. Average Travel Time by Commute Mode ...................................................... 42 Interregional Multimodal Commute Trip Planning Study | iii 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW The three-county region comprised by San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Merced counties has unique trans- portation problems that require unique solutions. Nearly a quarter of all commuters in the region travel to a different county to work - many to other regions including the Bay Area and Sacramento. Most of these trips are made by driving alone. Ensuring that the demand for interregional travel is well managed is a key objective
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California
    A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California A Research Report from the University of California Institute of Transportation Studies Jean-Daniel Saphores, Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Department of Urban Planning and Public Policy, University of California, Irvine Deep Shah, Master’s Student, University of California, Irvine Farzana Khatun, Ph.D. Candidate, University of California, Irvine January 2020 Report No: UC-ITS-2019-55 | DOI: 10.7922/G2XP735Q Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. UC-ITS-2019-55 N/A N/A 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California January 2020 6. Performing Organization Code ITS-Irvine 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Jean-Daniel Saphores, Ph.D., https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9514-0994; Deep Shah; N/A and Farzana Khatun 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. Institute of Transportation Studies, Irvine N/A 4000 Anteater Instruction and Research Building 11. Contract or Grant No. Irvine, CA 92697 UC-ITS-2019-55 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered The University of California Institute of Transportation Studies Final Report (January 2019 - January www.ucits.org 2020) 14. Sponsoring Agency Code UC ITS 15. Supplementary Notes DOI:10.7922/G2XP735Q 16. Abstract To gain a better understanding of the current use and performance of free and reduced-fare transit pass programs, researchers at UC Irvine surveyed California transit agencies with a focus on members of the California Transit Association (CTA) during November and December 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Routes Between Davis & Downtown Sacramento Routes
    Updated 6/26/08 - Cancellation of “I-5 Shuttle” between Woodland, Airport, & Sacramento - Extension of Express Routes 43 & 45 until July 23 YOLOBUS Service During I-5 Construction A portion of I-5 in downtown Sacramento will be undergoing major Caltrans reconstruction, starting at 8 p.m., on Friday, May 30th and ending at 5 a.m. on Thursday, July 24th. The web site explaining the I-5 construction schedule is at http://fixi5.com/news.html . Routes Between Davis & Downtown Sacramento Express routes 44, 230, 231, and 232 will retain their existing schedule; however, we strongly suggest that route 44 and 230 riders take the earlier morning buses. Express routes do not run on weekends or July 4th. Route 43 Express between Davis and Sacramento (Effective 6/2/08-7/23/08) ADDITIONAL ROUTE 43 TRIPS WILL BE EXTENDED UNTIL WEDNESDAY, JULY 23rd. This route serves UCD, central, and northeast Davis. We will be adding two morning and two afternoon extra route 43 express trips during the I-5 project. Capitol Corridor “Fix I-5” Train Tickets For Travel between Davis and Sacramento Currently, the Discounted Capitol Corridor train tickets will expire on July 14th. However, we will keep you updated if Caltrans/Amtrak will allow us to extend the tickets until July 23rd. The tickets will be valid on weekdays only between Monday, June 2nd and Monday, July 14th (excluding July 4th). “Fix I-5” subsidized train tickets will be sold only to riders who indicate they are not current train or bus riders. The one-way train tickets are $2 a piece, with a limit of no more than 60 tickets sold per person.
    [Show full text]
  • Updated Default Values for Transit Dependency and Average Length
    Updated Default Values for Transit Dependency and Average Length of Unlinked Transit Passenger Trips, for Calculations Using TAC Methods for California Climate Investments Programs Summary Report California Climate Investments Quantification Methods Assessment California Air Resources Board Agreement #16TTD004 Prepared by: Elisa Barbour with Susan Handy, Alissa Kendall and Jamey Volker Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis August 13, 2019 Background Under California’s Cap-and-Trade program, the State’s portion of the proceeds from Cap-and-Trade auctions is deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). The Legislature and Governor enact budget appropriations from the GGRF for State agencies to invest in projects that help achieve the State’s climate goals. These investments are collectively called California Climate Investments. Senate Bill (SB) 862 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop guidance on reporting and quantification methods for all State agencies that receive appropriations from the GGRF. CARB may review and update quantification methods, as needed. CARB has developed quantification methods to provide project-level greenhouse gas (GHG) and co-benefit estimates for administering agencies to use when selecting projects for funding from California Climate Investments programs. To measure GHG emission reductions from transportation projects, CARB relies on a method it published with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in 2005 for evaluating motor vehicle fee registration projects and congestion mitigation and air quality improvement (CMAQ) projects, specifically transit and connectivity (TAC) features.1 This report addresses whether and how CARB might update two adjustment factors in the TAC methods that apply to transit facility and/or service expansion projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Unitrans Records AR-071
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/c8gt5tm1 No online items Inventory of the Unitrans Records AR-071 Finding aid created by Archives and Special Collections staff University of California, Davis Library, University Archives 2018 1st Floor, Shields Library, University of California 100 North West Quad Davis, CA [email protected] URL: https://www.library.ucdavis.edu/archives-and-special-collections Inventory of the Unitrans Records AR-071 1 AR-071 Language of Material: English Contributing Institution: University of California, Davis Library, University Archives Title: Unitrans Records Creator: Unitrans (University transport system) Identifier/Call Number: AR-071 Physical Description: 4.4 linear feet Date (inclusive): 1966-2008 Abstract: Annual reports, schedules, newspaper clippings, photographs, and memorabilia documenting the history of Unitrans, the University and City of Davis bus service. Researchers should contact Special Collections to request collections, as many are stored offsite. History In the late 1960's, the Associated Students of UC Davis (ASUCD) explored possibilities for providing bus transportation to students traveling between the City of Davis and the campus. The University Transport System, or Unitrans, was founded by ASUCD and service officially began on February 28, 1968 with two London double decker buses operating on two routes. In 2008, Unitrans provided transportation with buses on 15 routes, carrying over 3 million passengers a year. Scope and Content of Collection Annual reports, schedules, newspaper clippings, photographs, and memorabilia documenting the history of Unitrans, the University and City of Davis bus service. Access Collection is open for research. Processing Information Liz Phillips encoded this finding aid with help from student assistant Aditi Sinha.
    [Show full text]
  • Apta Health & Safety Commitments Program
    APTA HEALTH & SAFETY COMMITMENTS PROGRAM We’re all In This Together! Participating Agencies Transit Agency Headquarters Location Antelope Valley Transit Authority Lancaster CA Battle Creek Transit Battle Creek MI Blacksburg Transit Blacksburg, VA Broward County Transit Plantation FL Cambria County Transit Authority (CamTran) Johnstown PA Capital District Transportation Authority Albany NY Central Contra Costa Transit Concord CA Central Ohio Transit Authority Columbus OH Central Pennsylvania Transportation Authority York PA Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District Urbana IL Chatham Area Transit Authority Savannah GA Chicago Transit Authority Chicago IL City of Fresno Transit Fresno CA City of Gardena (G-Trans) Gardena CA City of Modesto Area Express Modesto CA Collins Bus service Windsor CT Community Transit Everett WA Connecticut DOT -- CT Rail Glastonbury CT Culver City Transit Culver City CA Dallas Area Rapid Transit Dallas TX Delaware Transit Corporation Dover DE Denton County Transportation Authority Lewisville TX Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority Des Moines IA Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority Antioch CA Embark Transit Authority Oklahoma City OK Everett Transit Everett WA Foothill Transit West Covina CA Fort Bend County Public Transportation Rosenberg TX Franklin Transit Authority Franklin TN Georgia Regional Transportation Authority Atlanta GA Gold Coast Transit District Oxnard CA Greater Bridgeport Transit District Bridgeport CT Greater Hartford Transit District Harford CT Greater New Haven Transit District New Haven
    [Show full text]
  • Solanoexpress Bus Routes Transit Information Fairfield Transportation Center Fairfield
    Regional Transit Map Transit REGIONAL TRANSIT DIAGRAM To To Eureka Clearlake Information Mendocino Transit DOWNTOWN AREA TRANSIT CONNECTIONS Authority To Ukiah Lake Oakland Mendocino Transit 12th Street Oakland City Center BART: Greyhound BART, AC Transit FA FA 19th Street Oakland BART: FA BART, AC Transit Cloverdale San Francisco Yolobus To Davis Civic Center/UN Plaza BART: Winters Fairfi eld and Suisun Transit SolanoExpress is Solano SolanoExpress is Solano BART, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans Fairfield 101 Embarcadero BART & Ferry Terminal: County’s intercity transit connection. County’s intercity transit connection. BART, Golden Gate Transit, Muni, SamTrans, (FAST) is the local transit system Baylink, Alameda/Oakland Ferry, Alameda Harbor Faireld and Healdsburg Bay Ferry, Blue & Gold Fleet, Amtrak CA Thruway Suisun Transit SolanoExpress routes connect cities SolanoExpress routes connect cities Transit To Sacramento for Fairfi eld and Suisun City and also Mongomery Street BART: Healdsburg BART, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans Dixon within the county and provide service within the county and provide service Calistoga Readi- operates many of the SolanoExpress (Operated by FAST) (Operated by SolTrans) Handi Powell Street BART: Transportation Ride Van Calistoga BART, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans regional routes. Please visit www.fasttransit. to neighboring counties, BART, and the ferry. to neighboring counties, BART, and the ferry. San Francisco Caltrain at 4th & King: Dixon Windsor Deer Caltrain, Muni, Amtrak CA Thruway org or call 707-422-BUSS (707-422-2877) for For more information, call (800) 535-6883 or For more information, call (800) 535-6883 or Park Transbay Temporary Terminal: Guerneville AC Transit, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans, 80 visit www.solanoexpress.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Tcrp Report 94
    TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH TCRP PROGRAM REPORT 94 Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration Fare Policies, Structures and Technologies: Update TCRP OVERSIGHT AND PROJECT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2003 (Membership as of March 2003) SELECTION COMMITTEE (as of October 2002) OFFICERS CHAIR Chair: Genevieve Giuliano, Director and Prof., School of Policy, Planning, and Development, USC, Los Angeles J. BARRY BARKER Vice Chair: Michael S. Townes, Exec. Dir., Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads, Hampton, VA Transit Authority of River City Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS DANNY ALVAREZ MEMBERS Miami-Dade Transit Agency KAREN ANTION MICHAEL W. BEHRENS, Executive Director, Texas DOT Karen Antion Consulting JOSEPH H. BOARDMAN, Commissioner, New York State DOT GORDON AOYAGI SARAH C. CAMPBELL, President, TransManagement, Inc., Washington, DC Montgomery County Government E. DEAN CARLSON, Secretary of Transportation, Kansas DOT JEAN PAUL BAILLY JOANNE F. CASEY, President, Intermodal Association of North America Union Internationale des Transports Publics JAMES C. CODELL III, Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet RONALD L. BARNES JOHN L. CRAIG, Director, Nebraska Department of Roads Central Ohio Transit Authority BERNARD S. GROSECLOSE, JR., President and CEO, South Carolina State Ports Authority LINDA J. BOHLINGER SUSAN HANSON, Landry University Prof. of Geography, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University HNTB Corp. LESTER A. HOEL, L. A. Lacy Distinguished Professor, Depart. of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia ANDREW BONDS, JR. HENRY L. HUNGERBEELER, Director, Missouri DOT Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. JENNIFER L. DORN ADIB K. KANAFANI, Cahill Prof. and Chair, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of FTA California at Berkeley NATHANIEL P.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Location Database Technical Documentation and User Guide
    SMART LOCATION DATABASE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION AND USER GUIDE Version 3.0 Updated: June 2021 Authors: Jim Chapman, MSCE, Managing Principal, Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. (UD4H) Eric H. Fox, MScP, Senior Planner, UD4H William Bachman, Ph.D., Senior Analyst, UD4H Lawrence D. Frank, Ph.D., President, UD4H John Thomas, Ph.D., U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization Alexis Rourk Reyes, MSCRP, U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization About This Report The Smart Location Database is a publicly available data product and service provided by the U.S. EPA Smart Growth Program. This version 3.0 documentation builds on, and updates where needed, the version 2.0 document.1 Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. updated this guide for the project called Updating the EPA GSA Smart Location Database. Acknowledgements Urban Design 4 Health was contracted by the U.S. EPA with support from the General Services Administration’s Center for Urban Development to update the Smart Location Database and this User Guide. As the Project Manager for this study, Jim Chapman supervised the data development and authored this updated user guide. Mr. Eric Fox and Dr. William Bachman led all data acquisition, geoprocessing, and spatial analyses undertaken in the development of version 3.0 of the Smart Location Database and co- authored the user guide through substantive contributions to the methods and information provided. Dr. Larry Frank provided data development input and reviewed the report providing critical input and feedback. The authors would like to acknowledge the guidance, review, and support provided by: • Ruth Kroeger, U.S. General Services Administration • Frank Giblin, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Millbrae Climate Action Plan
    City of Millbrae Climate Action Plan Final Initial Study–Negative Declaration prepared for City of Millbrae 621 Magnolia Avenue Millbrae, California 94030 prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. 449 15th Street, Suite 303 Oakland, California 94612 October 14, 2020 Table of Contents Table of Contents Initial Study .............................................................................................................................................1 Proposed Plan Title .........................................................................................................................1 Lead Agency/Plan Sponsor and Contact .........................................................................................1 Plan Location and Physical Setting .................................................................................................1 Existing Setting ................................................................................................................................4 General Plan Designation and Zoning .......................................................................................... 11 Description of Plan (2020 CAP) .................................................................................................... 11 Cumulative Projects Scenario ...................................................................................................... 20 Required Approvals ..................................................................................................................... 20 Environmental
    [Show full text]
  • Solano Express Bus Routes Transit Information Pleasant Hill Station Area Contra Costa Centre
    Fare Information effective January 1, 2016 Senior3 Adult/ (65+) Youth2 County Connection & (6-64) For more detailed information about BART Disabled service, please see the BART Schedule, BART 1 Transit CASH FARES (exact change only) Regional Transit Map System Map, and other BART information REGIONAL TRANSIT DIAGRAM displays in this station. Regular Ride $2.00 $1.00 To To Express Ride (900 series route numbers) $2.25 $1.00 Eureka Clearlake Information Mendocino Transit DOWNTOWN AREA TRANSIT CONNECTIONS PREPAID FARES Authority To Ukiah Lake Oakland ® 4 $2.00 $1.00 Mendocino Transit 12th Street Oakland City Center BART: Clipper Cash Value Greyhound BART, AC Transit 19th Street Oakland BART: 5 $3.75 $1.75 BART, AC Transit Day Pass Cloverdale San Francisco Yolobus To Davis Discount Regular/Express 20-Ride Pass N/A $15.00 Civic Center/UN Plaza BART: Winters BART, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans Commuter Card (20 Regular+BART Transfer-Rides) $40.00 N/A Pleasant Hill 101 Embarcadero BART & Ferry Terminal: BART, Golden Gate Transit, Muni, SamTrans, Baylink, Alameda/Oakland Ferry, Alameda Harbor Faireld and 6 $60.00 N/A Healdsburg Bay Ferry, Blue & Gold Fleet, Amtrak CA Thruway Suisun Transit East Bay Regional Local 31-Day Transit To Sacramento Mongomery Street BART: Healdsburg BART, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans Dixon 6 $70.00 N/A Calistoga Readi- County Connection (CCCTA) effective January 1, 2016 East Bay Regional Express 31-Day Handi Powell Street BART: San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Fare Information Station Area Ride BART Red* Ticket
    [Show full text]
  • Opportunities to Expand the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’S Corporate Pass Program
    Opportunities to Expand the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s Corporate Pass Program APRIL 2015 © Streetka2004 | Dreamstime.com Acknowledgements A Better City (ABC) would like to thank the Barr Foundation whose generous support helped to make this report possible. ABC extends a thank you to Larry Filler of Contents LF Consulting for researching and authoring this report. 3 Summary We would like to thank the representatives from the 18 transit agencies that were inter- 6 Introduction viewed. Their insight and information helped 7 Methodology shape the best practices identified through our research. 8 Background on the MBTA Corporate Sales Program 10 Identification of Companies to Target in Boston, Cambridge and Somerville 11 National Scan of Corporate Sales Programs 12 Program Types A Better City improves the economic com- petitiveness and quality of life of the Boston 15 Transit Benefits region by advancing and providing leader- ship on significant transportation, land 16 Profile of Corporate Pass Sale Customers development, and environmental policies, 16 Program Growth and Goals projects, and initiatives related to the commercial real estate sector. 18 Websites 19 Marketing and Sales / Staffing 19 Marketing 19 Sales / Staffing 21 Trip Reduction Laws and Tax Credits 23 Best Practices Recommendations 24 Recommendations to Increase Program Participation 26 Conclusion 27 Appendices 27 A: Major Employers COVER PHOTOS 39 B: Business Organizations (Top) Charlie Card: © Mr.TinDC/CreativeCommons (Bottom, clockwise from upper left) 40 C: Corporate Sales Programs Bus: © Mr.TinDC/Creative Commons Subway: © JasonNobody/Creative Commons 42 D: Program Profiles Boat: © massmatt/CreativeCommons Commuter Rail: © jpitha/Creative Commons 47 E: Questionnaire Summary The goal of this project is to increase by 10% the number of small and medium-sized businesses participating in the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s (MBTA) Corporate Pass Program (“MBTA Program” or “Program”).
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2016-17 LCTOP List of Awarded Projects
    State of California • Department of Transportation NEW RELEASE Date: July 3, 2017 District: Headquarters Contact: Vanessa Wiseman Phone: (916) 654-2936 Contact: Tamie McGowen Phone: (916) 657-5060 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE More Than $34 Million Awarded to 125 Projects Under Cap-and-Trade Fund 85 Percent of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funding Will Benefit Disadvantaged Communities SACRAMENTO – Caltrans today announced that 125 local projects received $34.5 million in funding from the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program. These projects continue California’s effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve the sustainability of public transportation systems around the state. “This program is one of the methods Caltrans is using to help the state meet its ambitious goals to address climate change,” said Caltrans Director Malcolm Dougherty. “Building a more sustainable public transportation system involves not only making it more climate friendly, but also more efficient and affordable to more Californians.” The Low Carbon Transit Operations Program is one of several state programs which are funded through auction proceeds from the California Air Resources Board’s Cap- and-Trade Program into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Funding from this program goes toward direct investments in transit projects that reduce GHG emissions and benefit disadvantaged communities throughout California. These projects are part of the California Climate Investments, which provide a variety of additional benefits to California communities. Some of the local projects that will benefit from these funding disbursements include: • Expanded Service on the 9R: $3,764,725 to the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency to expand transit service on Route 9R San Bruno Rapid Line, increasing mobility and encouraging a greater use of transit.
    [Show full text]