TO: AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM: Michael A. Hursh, General Manager
SUBJECT: Quick Build Program Update and Next Steps
BRIEFING ITEM
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Title
Consider receiving report on the strategy and next steps for Quick Build transit projects. [Requested by Director Walsh - 2/10/21]
Body
STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE:
Goal - Convenient and Reliable Service
Initiative - Infrastructure Modernization
The Quick Build program would help to address increasingly slow bus speeds by building transit priority infrastructure throughout the District, improving the customer experience by reducing delay and improving schedule reliability.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Staffing the Quick Build program in the near-term would be done by assigning staff currently transitioning between projects and would have no fiscal impact other than the continuation of one full time equivalent position. However, to have a long-term, sustainable program, the District should consider a dedicated program manager responsible for improving the speed and reliability of transit service.
Projects planned and developed through the Quick Build program would be funded through the District’s Capital Budget through available grant and program funds for small-scale transit performance improvements.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The Quick Build concept is intended to help the District rapidly implement small-scale projects that improve transit operations and help to achieve long-term speed and reliability goals. Projects like “red carpet” bus lanes, queue-jump lanes, temporary features or pilot projects could be deployed throughout the District to provide benefits to bus riders and help overcome transit rider hesitancy. These could take the form of stand-alone projects at bottlenecks or be part of a larger corridor-wide effort. Staff has begun to identify possible projects with staff in Oakland and Berkeley and to advocate for these types of projects with funding agencies.
The District has submitted a grant application under the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Safe and Seamless Mobility Quick Strike Program through the Alameda County Transportation Commission’s (ACTC) Comprehensive Investment Program, in its role as the County Transportation Agency. This source of funding is a one-time program administered through the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) program which is a mix of the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) and Federal Highway Infrastructure Program (FHIP) funds. Funds must be obligated no later than September 30, 2022. As a requirement of the grant, recipient cities must submit their Surplus Land Requirements Resolution. Oakland has adopted their resolution and Berkeley is scheduled to adopt theirs on May 25; both are proposed to be recipients of funds for Quick Build projects. Future Quick Build projects would need to be funded using other sources.
The District’s first Quick Build application to the ACTC has three sub-components:
• Bus lanes and bus bulbs on Durant Avenue in Berkeley near Telegraph Avenue
• Bus lanes, bus bulbs and traffic signal upgrades on MacArthur Boulevard in Oakland near Oakland High School and Park Boulevard
• Bus lane delineation treatment along International Boulevard
To build upon this initial effort, staff will investigate the following as possible next steps.
1. Assign District Staff to Lead Program. Assign or hire a dedicated staff person to administer the current projects and create a District-wide Quick Build program that can be sustained. Implementing many small-scale projects is very labor-intensive. Assigning a dedicated staff person would enable the District to develop a plan, seek funding, conduct public engagement, and manage the planning, design and construction. This is particularly important to advance coordination in local jurisdictions that may not have the same priorities as the District or that may have an extensive outreach and approval processes for projects in their right-of-way.
2. Develop Overall Plan/Strengthen Funding Readiness. Ensure readiness for funding as it becomes available by formally developing a comprehensive District-wide plan and program. This step would also investigate the efficacy of packaging projects together to demonstrate the benefits to funding agencies and mitigate the higher overhead costs of small individual projects.
3. Secure Local Jurisdiction Commitment. The support of local jurisdictions can be aided in multiple ways including advocacy from staff, the Board, city officials and community groups, and by jointly pursuing funding for projects with cities. In addition, the District should work with local jurisdictions to take advantage of local, state and federal policies to implement demonstration or pilot projects that help alleviate community and stakeholder concerns through quick, temporary, low-cost construction strategies. Hopefully, these strategies could also bypass some of the typical design-review and permission processes through project elements that could be removed if deemed unsuccessful.
4. Overcome Funding Barriers. The Bay Area does not have a long-term approach to funding diffuse small-scale investments like Quick Build and current sources are only available on a one-time basis. There needs to be advocacy and education to ensure that it becomes enshrined in the funding landscape, especially as the region is focused on transit recovery and future available infrastructure funds.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The advantages of the proposed strategy and next steps would be to better position the District to compete for funds geared toward small-scale projects. One disadvantage is the potential diversion of funding to small-scale Quick build projects from more traditional corridor-based projects. While both have similar end goals, the projects would be very different by nature; corridor projects are often larger investments that can transform the function of the corridor such as the District’s Tempo Bus Rapid Transit line. An additional potential disadvantage is that if a Quick Build program is not efficiently managed or implemented, the result could be a significant amount of staff effort for minimal benefit.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
An alternative to taking the next steps would be to not assign dedicated staff and pursue projects as workload of current staffing levels allow. Staff does not recommend this approach because this would result in Quick Build projects that are far and few between to result in any type of measurable benefit.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION/POLICIES:
SR 20-336 Transit Recovery Infrastructure - A Quick Build Framework
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Prepared by:
Jim Cunradi, Transportation Planning Manager
Approved/Reviewed by:
Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development and Planning
Ramakrishna Pochiraju, Executive Director of Planning & Engineering
Chris Andrichak, Chief Financial Officer