Accessibility of

Proposed Bay Area

Rail Transit Extensions:An Evaluation of Opportunities

for Transit-Oriented Development

Kevin Fang

California Polytechnic State University

Presentation to the

Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference

California State University – San Bernardino

November 6, 2009

Presentation Outline

Study Background/Purpose

Methodology

Accessibility Results

Policy Implications

Study Background

Series of proposed actions in

MTC 2035 Transportation Plan

Study focuses on extensions to

the intra-region commuter and

heavy rail network

BART to Silicon Valley

eBART

Caltrain to Downtown SF

Dumbarton Rail

Study Purpose

Determine how accessible these extensions/stations

along extensions are

Accessibility serves as surrogate for opportunities for

transit-oriented development

See how extensions enhance the overall accessibility

of the entire regionwide network

Why Study Accessibility and TOD?

Shift the paradigm from Automobility Planning to

Accessibility Planning (Cervero, 2000)

Issues with the current auto-oriented

transportation and land use

Environmental

Preferential

Subsidization of public transportation

Take advantage of investments when they are made

Economic

Social

Methodology

Calculate an accessibility index

Compare relative accessibility of stations

Explore accessibility changes with network expansion

Index based off generalized gravity model

Jobs surrogate as Size of Attraction

Time based friction factor for Distance component

Accessibility =Size of Attraction

Distance

ABAlternative Network

Configurations

Accessibility compared

from present to future

through analysis of 3

Alternative Network

Configurations

A – Current Network:

Trunk and Branch

B – Future Network #1:

Loop and Branches

C – Future Network #2:

Loop, Cross-Link, and

Branches

Source: ESRI Shaded Relief Basemap, MTC

C

Systemwide Accessibility Increases

568.10 669.50 673.31

+17.8% +0.6%----------

+18.5%--

A B C

Increases by Sub-Regional Area Type

Accessibility growth favors central cities/inner suburbs

37.5% 32.7% 25.9% 4.0%

0.9% 2.0% 96.4% 0.7%

36.1% 31.6% 28.4% 3.8%

Sha

re o

f G

row

th A B

A

B C

C

Central City

CBD

Central City

Non-CBD

Inner Ring

Suburb

Outer Ring

Suburbs

Accessibility

of New Lines

New stations

on average

less accessible

than existing

stations

BART to Silicon

Valley on

average rank

in upper half

of stations

Index .52

Rank 84.9

Index 6.66

Rank 39.3

BART-Silicon Valley

Caltrain-Downtown. SF

eBART

Dumbarton Rail

Index 2.62

Rank 64

Index .80

Rank 79.7

Average Accessibility Index and Ranks (out of 93) – Alt. C

7.64 7.44 7.24

A B C

Average Accessibility Index by Network Configuration

Share of Accessibility Generation

90.56% 77.06% 4.20%

-- 0.49% 3.16%

-- 9.35% 59.82%

9.44% 10.99% 19.36%

-- 1.94% 12.41%

-- 0.16% 1.04%

Caltrain-Downtown SF station is not particularly accessible to other stations, but shows value as a large activity center accessible to nearby stations

Share of Accessibility GenerationShare of Growth

Attributable To Line

BART

Caltrain

BART-Silicon Valley

Caltrain-Downtown SF

eBART

Dumbarton Rail

CFull

BuildAExisting CA

Surrounding

Land Use

Surrounding land use can either support or be obstacle to TOD

Right: Agglomerated map of General Plan Land Use Designations

Source: ESRI Shaded Relief Basemap, MTC, ABAG

Generalized Land Uses in the San Francisco Bay Area

Surrounding Areas That Are Low Density Residential (1/2 Mile)

Implications: Site

TOD Opportunities

One possible

interpretation:

(Index A + Index B +

Index C) * (1 - % Low

Density Residential)

Source: ESRI Shaded Relief Basemap, MTC

Implications: Prioritization of Extensions

Will receive 50 percent ofnew systemwide accessibility

Jobs along line make it almost as important as entire Caltrain system in generating accessibility at other stations

1 station will generate 2 percentof systemwide accessibility

Lacks major job centers along/near line

Connectivity provides limited travel time benefits to major job centers

Lacks major job centers along/near line

1. BART-Silicon Valley

2. Caltrain-Downtown SF

3b. eBART

3a. Dumbarton Rail

Conclusions

Accessibility is just one, but a very important, factor for TOD.

Sites with highest potential are within close proximity to major activity centers

Connectivity promotes accessibility if provide time savings to major activity centers

Society can change outcome of outlying, less assessable stations with plans to transform stations with low showing into major activity centers, e.g. Pleasanton, Walnut Creek, etc