DOCSLIB.ORG

EMMA Official Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. The 2020 Bonds are deliverable in fully registered form and, when issued, will be registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York (“DTC”). Individual purchases of the 2020 Bonds will be made in principal amounts of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof and will be in book-entry form only. Purchasers of the 2020 Bonds will not receive bonds representing their beneficial ownership in the 2020 Bonds but will receive a credit balance on the books of their respective DTC Direct Participants or DTC Indirect Participants. The 2020 Bonds will not be transferable or exchangeable except for transfer to another nominee of DTC or as otherwise described herein. Principal on the 2020 Bonds is payable in the amounts and on the dates set forth on the inside cover. Interest on the 2020C-1 Bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 2021, and interest on the 2020C-2 Bonds is paid on the maturity date thereof. The principal of the 2020 Bonds is payable by U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee, to Cede & Co., the registered owner of the 2020 Bonds, and such interest and principal payments are to be disbursed to the beneficial owners of the 2020 Bonds through their respective DTC Direct Participants or DTC Indirect Participants. The 2020 Bonds are general obligations of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (the “District”), payable from and secured by ad valorem taxes to be levied upon all property subject to taxation by the District, without limitation as to rate or amount (except for certain personal property which is taxable at limited rates) levied in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties and the City and County of San Francisco, as more fully described herein. No other revenues of the District other than certain proceeds of the 2020 Bonds are pledged to the payment of the 2020 Bonds. The 2020C-1 Bonds are subject to optional and mandatory redemption prior to maturity as described herein. This cover page contains certain information for reference only. It is not a summary of this issue. Investors must read the entire Official Statement to obtain information essential to the making of an informed investment decision. The 2020 Bonds are offered when, as and if issued by the District and received by the Underwriters, subject to the approving opinion of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, San Francisco, California, Bond Counsel to the District. Certain legal matters will be passed upon for the Underwriters by their counsel, Curls Bartling P.C., and for the District by its General Counsel, Matthew Burrows, Esq., and by Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, as Disclosure Counsel to the District. The 2020 Bonds in book-entry-only form are expected to be delivered through the facilities of DTC on or about August 27, 2020. J.P. Morgan Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC Barclays Wells Fargo Securities Blaylock Van, LLC Dated: August 18, 2020 MATURITY SCHEDULES $625,005,000 SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (ELECTION OF 2016), 2020 SERIES C-1 BONDS (GREEN BONDS) $336,490,000 SERIAL BONDS Maturity Date Principal Interest CUSIP (Base: ISIN (Base: Common (August 1) Amount Rate Yield 797661)* US797661)* Code† 2024 $9,560,000 5.000% 0.100% ZA6 ZA67 222338042 2025 10,035,000 5.000 0.150 ZB4 ZB41 222338069 2026 10,530,000 5.000 0.230 ZC2 ZC24 222338077 2027 11,065,000 5.000 0.330 ZD0 ZD07 222338085 2028 11,610,000 5.000 0.430 ZE8 ZE89 222338093 2029 12,195,000 5.000 0.550 ZF5 ZF54 222338107 2030 12,800,000 4.000 0.660‡ ZG3 ZG38 222338115 2031 13,315,000 4.000 0.800‡ ZH1 ZH11 222338123 2032 13,850,000 4.000 0.940‡ ZJ7 ZJ76 222338131 2033 14,405,000 4.000 1.020‡ ZK4 ZK40 222338140 2034 14,980,000 4.000 1.130‡ ZL2 ZL23 222338158 2035 15,580,000 4.000 1.190‡ ZM0 ZM06 222338166 2036 16,205,000 3.000 1.490‡ ZN8 ZN88 222338174 2037 16,685,000 3.000 1.550‡ ZP3 ZP37 222338182 2038 17,185,000 3.000 1.590‡ ZQ1 ZQ10 222338204 2039 25,560,000 2.000 2.030 ZR9 ZR92 222338212 2040 26,080,000 2.000 2.070 ZS7 ZS75 222338239 2041 26,595,000 2.000 2.100 ZT5 ZT58 222445639 2042 27,130,000 2.000 2.130 ZU2 ZU22 222445647 2046 31,125,000 2.000 2.220 ZW8 ZW87 222445671 $86,385,000 4.000% Term Bond due August 1, 2045; Yield 1.640%‡; CUSIP* 797661ZV0; ISIN* US797661ZV05; Common Code† 222338247 $202,130,000 3.000% Term Bond due August 1, 2050; Yield 2.060%‡; CUSIP* 797661ZX6; ISIN* US797661ZX60; Common Code† 222338255 $74,995,000 SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (ELECTION OF 2016), 2020 SERIES C-2 BONDS (FEDERALLY TAXABLE) (GREEN BONDS) Maturity Date Principal Interest CUSIP (Base: ISIN (Base: Common (September 15) Amount Rate Yield 797661)* US797661)* Code† 2020 $74,995,000 0.170% 0.170% ZY4 ZY44 222338034 * CUSIP® is a registered trademark of the American Bankers Association. CUSIP Global Services (CGS) is managed on behalf of the American Bankers Association by S&P Global Market Intelligence. Copyright © 2020 CUSIP Global Services. All rights reserved. CUSIP® data herein is provided by CUSIP Global Services. This data is not intended to create a database and does not serve in any way as a substitute for the CGS database. CUSIP and ISIN numbers are provided for convenience only and neither the District nor the Underwriters takes any responsibility for the accuracy thereof. The CUSIP and/or ISIN numbers are subject to being changed after the issuance of the 2020 Bonds as a result of various subsequent actions, including, but not limited to, a refunding, in whole or in part of the 2020 Bonds. † The Common Code is provided herein by Euroclear Bank S.A./N.V. Neither the District nor the Underwriters are responsible for the selection or use of this Common Code and no representation is made as to their correctness on the 2020 Bonds. ‡ Yield to the par call date of August 1, 2029. SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT 300 Lakeside Drive, 23rd Floor Oakland, California 94612 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Lateefah Simon Mark Foley Debora Allen President Vice President Director Elizabeth Ames Bevan Dufty Janice Li Director Director Director John McPartland Robert Raburn Rebecca Saltzman Director Director Director OFFICERS Robert Powers – General Manager Rosemarie V. Poblete – Controller/Treasurer Patricia K. Williams – District Secretary Russell G. Bloom – Independent Police Auditor Harriet Richardson – Inspector General GENERAL COUNSEL Matthew Burrows, Esq. TRUSTEE U.S. Bank National Association San Francisco, California BOND AND DISCLOSURE COUNSEL Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP San Francisco, California MUNICIPAL ADVISOR Sperry Capital Inc. Sausalito, California (This page intentionally left blank) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 PLAN OF FINANCE ................................................................................................................................... 3 ESTIMATED SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS ................................................................................... 4 DESIGNATION AS GREEN BONDS / CLIMATE BOND CERTIFIED ................................................. 5 THE 2020 BONDS ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Purpose and Application of Proceeds ............................................................................................. 7 Authority for Issuance ....................................................................................................................
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]
  • Draft Plan Bay Area 2050 Air Quality Conformity Analysis
    DRAFT AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY AND CONSISTENCY REPORT JULY 2021 PBA2050 COMMISH BOARD DRAFT 06.14.21 Metropolitan Transportation Association of City Representatives Commission Bay Area Governments Susan Adams Alfredo Pedroza, Chair Jesse Arreguín, President Councilmember, City of Rohnert Park Napa County and Cities Mayor, City of Berkeley Nikki Fortunato Bas Nick Josefowitz, Vice Chair Belia Ramos, Vice President Councilmember, City of Oakland San Francisco Mayor's Appointee Supervisor, County of Napa London Breed Margaret Abe-Koga David Rabbitt, Mayor, City and County of San Francisco Cities of Santa Clara County Immediate Past President Tom Butt Supervisor, County of Sonoma Eddie H. Ahn Mayor, City of Richmond San Francisco Bay Conservation Pat Eklund and Development Commission County Representatives Mayor, City of Novato David Canepa Candace Andersen Maya Esparza San Mateo County Supervisor, County of Contra Costa Councilmember, City of San José Cindy Chavez David Canepa Carroll Fife Santa Clara County Supervisor, County of San Mateo Councilmember, City of Oakland Damon Connolly Keith Carson Neysa Fligor Marin County and Cities Supervisor, County of Alameda Mayor, City of Los Altos Carol Dutra-Vernaci Cindy Chavez Leon Garcia Cities of Alameda County Supervisor, County of Santa Clara Mayor, City of American Canyon Dina El-Tawansy Otto Lee Liz Gibbons California State Transportation Agency Supervisor, County of Santa Clara Mayor, City of Campbell (CalSTA) Gordon Mar Giselle Hale Victoria Fleming Supervisor, City and County Vice Mayor, City of Redwood City Sonoma County and Cities of San Francisco Barbara Halliday Dorene M. Giacopini Rafael Mandelman Mayor, City of Hayward U.S. Department of Transportation Supervisor, City and County Rich Hillis Federal D.
    [Show full text]
  • BART to Antioch Extension Title VI Equity Analysis & Public
    BART to Antioch Extension Title VI Equity Analysis & Public Participation Report October 2017 Prepared by the Office of Civil Rights San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Table of Contents I. BART to Antioch Title VI Equity Analysis Executive Summary 1 Section 1: Introduction 7 Section 2: Project Description 8 Section 3: Methodology 20 Section 4: Service Analysis Findings 30 Section 5: Fare Analysis Findings 39 II. Appendices Appendix A: 2017 BART to Antioch Survey Appendix B: Proposed Service Plan Appendix C: BART Ridership Project Analysis Appendix D: C-Line Vehicle Loading Analysis III. BART to Antioch Public Participation Report i ii BART to Antioch Title VI Equity Analysis and Public Participation Report Executive Summary In October 2011, staff completed a Title VI Analysis for Antioch Station (formerly known as Hillcrest Avenue Station). A Title VI/Environmental Justice analysis was conducted on the Pittsburg Center Station on March 19, 2015. Per the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Title VI Circular (Circular) 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients (October 1, 2012), the District is required to conduct a Title VI Service and Fare Equity Analysis (Title VI Equity Analysis) for the Project's proposed service and fare plan six months prior to revenue service. Accordingly, staff completed an updated Title VI Equity Analysis for the BART to Antioch (Project) service and fare plan, which evaluates whether the Project’s proposed service and fare will have a disparate impact on minority populations or a disproportionate burden on low-income populations based on the District’s Disparate Impact and Disproportionate Burden Policy (DI/DB Policy) adopted by the Board on July 11, 2013 and FTA approved Title VI service and fare methodologies.
    [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]
  • BART 2016 Factsheet
    BART 2016 Factsheet Connecting People to Opportunity BART by the Numbers For over four decades, BART has been an efficient, reliable way for families, friends, and commuters to • BART estimates ridership in FY16 safely reach their destinations. What started out as a futuristic dream in 1972 — then carrying only will average 430,000 trips on 100,000 passengers per week— has now grown to be a vital part of the regional culture and economy. weekdays and 129 million trips annually. However, as the Bay Area’s population swells, BART faces the challenge of upgrading and updating its • During peak commute hours, over nearly half century old infrastructure to meet the needs of a modern transit system. BART’s highly skilled 60,000 people ride through the and dedicated workforce is putting enormous effort into developing a plan for the future, and we are Transbay Tube in each direction. excited to work together toward a new era for BART transit. • BART’s Pittsburg/Bay Point (yellow) line carries the largest AMTRAK SAN JOAQUIN number of people. Pittsburg Center Station Antioch Station Richmond Pittsburg/Bay Point El Cerrito del Norte • Embarcadero and Montgomery North Concord/Martinez El Cerrito Plaza stations are the busiest in the Concord North Berkeley Pleasant Hill/Contra Costa Centre BART system. In FY15, over Downtown Berkeley Walnut Creek 170,000 trips were made to or Ashby Lafayette from these stations each weekday. Orinda Rockridge MacArthur TIMED TRANSFER (SOUTHBOUND) • Our top ridership day last year West Oakland 19th St/Oakland TIMED TRANSFER (NORTHBOUND) 12th St/Oakland City Center was June 19, 2015 for the SAN FRANCISCO Embarcadero Lake Merritt EAST BAY Warriors Championship Parade Montgomery St Fruitvale Powell St and A’s game —548,076 trips! Coliseum TRANSFER FOR SERVICE TO OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Civic Center/UN Plaza MUNI METRO San Leandro • BART directly serves SFO and Bay Fair 16th St Mission Castro Valley Dublin/Pleasanton OAK, the nation’s 7th and 35th 24th St Mission Glen Park Oakland busiest airports.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction This document is a supplemental environmental impact report (SEIR), prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations 15000 et seq.) (referred to herein as CEQA Guidelines). CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines are referred to herein collectively as CEQA. This SEIR is a supplement to the BART Warm Springs Extension Environmental Impact Report that was certified on September 15, 1992. The SEIR is an informational document intended to inform the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) Board of Directors, public agencies, and the public about the potentially significant environmental effects that may result from implementation of the BART Warm Springs Extension (WSX) (herein called the Proposed Project). See Section 1.6 for an explanation of the relationship of this SEIR to the EIR certified in 1992. The environmental analysis incorporated herein identifies the environmental impacts of an extension of the BART system in the City of Fremont (Fremont), from its current terminus in central Fremont to the Warm Springs district of Fremont. Once certified, this SEIR will provide the basis for BART to adopt a project. This analysis will support the development of an effective mitigation program for site-specific mitigation of potentially significant environmental impacts, and provide information to interested members of the public and public agencies about modifications to the 1992 Adopted Project and various potential impacts resulting from the modified project. Through the formal public review process, the public and various organizations and agencies will have an opportunity to comment on this document.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bulletin MAJOR CHANGES COMING to the Published by the Electric Railroaders’ GRAND CENTRAL SUBWAY STATION COMPLEX Association, Inc
    ERA BULLETIN — MAY, 2018 The Bulletin Electric Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated Vol. 61, No. 5 May, 2018 The Bulletin MAJOR CHANGES COMING TO THE Published by the Electric Railroaders’ GRAND CENTRAL SUBWAY STATION COMPLEX Association, Inc. P.O. Box 3323 by Subutay Musluoglu Grand Central Station New York, NY 10163 (Photographs by the author) For general inquiries, (Continued from March, 2018 issue) or Bulletin submissions, contact us at In the March, 2018 Bulletin, I described Two of them provided access to the mezza- [email protected] the first round of capacity upgrades and as- nine level of the 42nd Street Shuttle. One was or on our website at erausa.org/contact sociated improvements that have been com- 317 Madison Avenue, which occupied the pleted at the Grand Central subway station southeast corner of the block and actually Editorial Staff: complex. It had been my intention to contin- had its main entrance on E. 42nd Street (this Jeffrey Erlitz ue by specifically focusing on the creation of author worked in the building from 2004-5), Editor-in-Chief new stairways and the reconstruction of the and within its lobby there was a stairway existing stairways between the mezzanine down to the subway. Next door to the east Ronald Yee nd Tri-State News and and the platforms of the Lexington Avenue was 51 E. 42 Street, which featured an off- Commuter Rail Editor Line. However, the situation in the station sidewalk entrance within its front façade. has been very fluid lately, with an unusually These two entrances were essentially one Alexander Ivanoff North American and fast pace of work resulting in stairways open- unit, since both stairways joined together on World News Editor ing and closing on short notice.
    [Show full text]
  • Warm Springs Extension Title VI Equity Analysis and Public Participation Report
    Warm Springs Extension Title VI Equity Analysis and Public Participation Report May 7, 2015 Prepared jointly by CDM Smith and the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, Office of Civil Rights 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Section 1: Introduction 6 Section 2: Project Description 7 Section 3: Methodology 14 Section 4: Service Analysis Findings 23 Section 5: Fare Analysis Findings 27 Appendix A: 2011 Warm Springs Survey 33 Appendix B: Proposed Service Options Description 36 Public Participation Report 4 1 2 Warm Springs Extension Title VI Equity Analysis and Public Participation Report Executive Summary In June 2011, staff completed a Title VI Analysis for the Warm Springs Extension Project (Project). Per the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Title VI Circular (Circular) 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients (October 1, 2012), the District is required to conduct a Title VI Service and Fare Equity Analysis (Title VI Equity Analysis) for the Project's proposed service and fare plan six months prior to revenue service. Accordingly, staff completed an updated Title VI Equity Analysis for the Project’s service and fare plan, which evaluates whether the Project’s proposed service and fare will have a disparate impact on minority populations or a disproportionate burden on low-income populations based on the District’s Disparate Impact and Disproportionate Burden Policy (DI/DB Policy) adopted by the Board on July 11, 2013 and FTA approved Title VI service and fare methodologies. Discussion: The Warm Springs Extension will add 5.4-miles of new track from the existing Fremont Station south to a new station in the Warm Springs district of the City of Fremont, extending BART’s service in southern Alameda County.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Joint Planning Commission
    Downtown Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Strategy Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Meeting 8 Meeting Notes November 14, 2006 6:37 p.m. – CALL TO ORDER Attendance CAC Members Present: Alcantar, Brannan, Chi, Collier, Cuellas, Finberg, Free, Helmbrecht, Hopkinson, Houston, Kaplan, Markham, Mobley-Maundu, Raposo, Stensgard, Talley, Tannam, Trujillo, Ward CAC Members Absent: Flynn, Kleebauer, Sidari, Sykes, Storer Staff: Hanson Hom, Community Development Director, Kathleen Livermore, Senior Planner and TOD Project Manager Other: Michael Smiley, BMS Design Group, Tim Hurley, BMS Design Group, Jim Daisa, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Item 1: Welcome Anna Brannan, CAC Chair, opened the meeting and asked that both CAC members and members of the public sign in. Mayor Elect Tony Santos welcomed the Committee members and noted he recognized quite a few folks. He extended his personal appreciation for the work of the CAC. Mayor Elect Santos stated that the downtown is the heart of the community and this plan is vitally important for San Leandro and the future. This plan can help provide the essential critical mass and be a catalyst for development in the downtown. Mayor Elect Santos stressed the importance of evaluating noise impacts of any proposed development in the study area as he had heard from many residents in noise impacted areas during his campaign. He also stressed the importance of providing parks and open space in the downtown. Mayor Elect Santos noted that people will have to learn how to get out of their cars to make a successful pedestrian friendly oriented downtown. He again expressed his appreciation for the commitment of time.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.9 Land Use
    Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor Final EIS 5.9 LAND USE 5.9.1 INTRODUCTION An adverse effect on land use would occur if the alternatives physically divide an established community; change land use in a manner that would be incompatible with surrounding land uses; and conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation (see Table 5.9-1). Residential and nonresidential relocations associated with implementing the alternatives are discussed in Section 5.12, Socioeconomics. The alternatives would affect surrounding land use in a variety of ways, both during construction and operational phases (see Chapter 6, Construction, for discussion of effects from construction). Effects on land use include the physical effects of the ROW and station facilities, as well as ancillary facilities such as station entrances, ventilation shafts, electrical substations, park-and-ride lots, and yard and shops facilities. Two proposed park-and-ride lots are located outside of the BEP and SVRTP alternative alignments; the Downtown Sunnyvale Station park-and-ride lot and the Evelyn LRT Station park-and-ride lot. These two parcels are existing parking lots within the cities of Sunnyvale and Mountain View. Their current and proposed future uses are consistent with the applicable planning and zoning designations. The proposed Downtown Sunnyvale Station park-and-ride lot is designated in the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) as retail specialty grocery store and district parking. The proposed Evelyn LRT Station park-and-ride lot is designated in the Mountain View Zoning Ordinance as general industrial, including required parking. 5.9.2 METHODOLOGY The land use analysis for the No Build, BEP, and SVRTP alternatives focuses on four primary components: the alignment, the proposed station areas, the support facilities required for operation of the line, and the yard and shops options.
    [Show full text]
  • Better Bart Better Bay Area Better Bart / Better Bay Area
    BETTER BART BETTER BAY AREA BETTER BART / BETTER BAY AREA 2 2 BART SYSTEM—THEN AND NOW “The decision of the people to build a 3-county Bay Area rapid transit system is one of the most courageous and promising acts in modern American municipal history…” —San Francisco Examiner, November 9, 1962 Pittsburg Center Station Antioch Station 1974 Today 3 3 MAKING A BETTER BAY AREA 4 4 BAY BRIDGE RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC *One “person” = 500 people. 2014 Caltrans and BART peak direction totals for peak hour, based on an average of non-holiday Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays. Assumes 71% of vehicles use SOV lanes with average occupancy of 1.15 persons/car, and 29% of vehicles use HOV lanes with average occupancy of 2.65 persons/car, based on 2014 Bay Area Toll Authority data and 2012 Caltrans Bay Area Managed Lanes report. 55 5 MANAGEMENT & STEWARDSHIP Reliability is Improving Revenue Accountability is High Mean Time Between Service BART has historically had one of Disruption—Vehicle Caused the highest farebox ratios of all U.S. heavy rail 4,000 100% 3,000 80% 60% 2,000 40% 1,000 20% FAREBOX RATIO RECOVERY FAREBOX 0 0% HOURS BETWEEN DISRUPTION BETWEEN SERVICE HOURS BART WMATA NYCT Caltrain CTA MARTA Muni *National Transit Database (NTD) data, the source of these figures, excludes certain operating expenses, such as building leases, legal settlements, and Other Post Employment Benefits. 6 6 BUILDING A BETTER BART 7 7 LABOR RELATIONS 8 8 BART TO OAK AIRPORT • 3.2-mile extension from Coliseum Station to the Oakland International Airport • Automated, driverless
    [Show full text]
  • View Reducing Parking at Transit Stations
    Rail~Volution Salt Lake City, Utah 8-10 September, 2005 Reducing Parking at Transit Stations Jeffrey Tumlin EVALUATING PARKING AT TRANSIT STATIONS • Effects on transit ridership – Transit Oriented Development (TOD): New households & transit trips – Parking: Park-&-Ride participants – Implications for encouraging future growth in ridership • Effects on traffic congestion – Walking, cycling & transit trips to station – Proportion and amount of vehicle trips to station – Implications in allocating of street right-of-way • Effects on revenue generation – Lease or sale of land: Land value with higher density & mixed use compared to parking – Development of land: Joint development, economic vitality – Productive use of land: Economic productivity, sales tax Reduced Transit Parking at Rail Stations Jeffrey Tumlin, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING TRANSIT PARKING • SkyTrain system in Vancouver, BC (TransLink) – Land use concentration around SkyTrain – Transportation supply – Transportation demand including low to no parking • Metrorail stations in Arlington County, VA (WMATA) – Urban village development – Multimodal transportation – Shared parking only (No park-&-ride) • South Hayward station in Northern California (BART) – Plans to develop area around station and improve pedestrian, bicycle and bus access – Determining amount of replacement parking Reduced Transit Parking at Rail Stations Jeffrey Tumlin, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting TRANSLINK SKYTRAIN SYSTEM Reduced Transit Parking at Rail Stations Jeffrey Tumlin, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Greater Vancouver Reduced Transit Parking at Rail Stations Canada – US BorderJeffrey Tumlin, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Vancouver’s Regional Planning Context • GVTA Act – Support Livable Region Strategic Plan • Transport strategy aims to increase choice through 3 “levers” – Land use i.e. town centers, employment, , residential density – Transportation supply-side e.g rapid transit network – Transportation demand- side e.g.
    [Show full text]