The Multimodal Trail System

I shared information in an earlier blog post about the importance of incorporating multimodal travel options in planning for the Connector. We’re working now on planning the trail system that will follow the final Connector alignment, and I wanted to share some details about the possibilities.

For Alternatives 1, 2 and 4, plans call for a Class 1 facility. It would be much like the American River bike trail: a 10-12-foot wide path off to the side of the roadway. We’re talking now about the enhancements that could be part of this trail, like small park areas with shade trees and picnic benches, drinking fountains and restroom facilities.

We’re also talking about integrating a way-finding system with this facility, to provide context of locations and distances, as well as where streets or intersections lead. It would be a self-contained system for pedestrians, bicyclists and equestrians. I believe a facility of this nature would be a real community asset.

With Alternative 3, plans are shaping up for the trail to be a five-foot wide Class 2 bikeway. The path would be attached to the roadway, similar to the bike paths you see in cities and counties throughout the region. With this option, instead of building a new facility, we would strive to provide linkages between existing trail facilities. There are a multitude of trail systems throughout the region, such as the Laguna Creek Trail System and the Deer Creek Hills Preserve Trail System, but they don’t all connect. The Connector would, as the name suggests, connect them.

This trail wouldn’t offer users the same experience as the Class 1 trail, but it would improve the existing system and provide more recreational interconnectivity. We’re not able to plan a Class 1 trail along this alternative because there are driveways and businesses next to the roadway, and a Class 1 trail would interfere with access.

With either option, we would strive to design the path to facilitate multimodal travel and remove as many barriers as possible. It can be difficult to travel by bicycle or foot because of intersections with roadways, but we would try to guard against that and provide bicycle interchanges, bridges or tunnels to allow a free flow of traffic for all types of travel.

But we can’t plan these trails in a vacuum—we need help from the community to determine the best option. We are developing cost estimates for both options and will begin an outreach program in the September-October timeframe to gather input before making a recommendation to the Board.

Environmental Issues: Mitigation Funding

Another important element of the Connector project is the environmental review. This process is underway now, with experts conducting studies to determine the relationship of the Connector to various aspects of the environment. Another important element of the project development process, which you may not be familiar with, is mitigation funding.

The overall Connector project has $15 million set aside exclusively for environmental mitigation. There are a variety of ways those funds could be used, including for habitat preservation, open space acquisition, smart growth development and other corridor-related items. We won’t know how to best use the funds until after the specifics of the Project are better understood and public input is provided as the environmental documents are developed.

Within the Measure A sales tax program, which is the current primary funding source for the Connector, there are three distinct programs that will each allocate $5 million to the planning, development and acquisition of the Cosumnes River Open Space Preserve. The specific location for this open space has yet to be developed but one option is to partner with or become part of a current regional effort for a comprehensive conservation strategy, known as the South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan (SSHCP).

Multiple local jurisdictions, including three of the five Connector member jurisdictions, are working together on the SSHCP to determine the best way to manage and plan for future growth while preserving the nature and character of the area. We are very interested in being involved with the SSHCP, as it brings many benefits. We believe that its comprehensive strategy is a perfect fit for us, but more work must be done before a final decision is made on the Connector’s participation.

Since one of the two primary goals of the Connector project is preservation of open space it is clear that a significant effort, one incorporating input from environmental groups, regulatory agencies and the member jurisdictions, will be forthcoming to determine the best mitigation strategy for the project. The $15 million that is set aside will provide a good start for any strategy that is eventually developed and applied. As the project develops, additional funding may be available from outside sources to participate in efforts such as the SSHCP or other forthcoming open space programs.

It remains to be seen how much development will take place around the Connector and we, the project, don’t have a say in what individual jurisdictions decide to do. The environmental studies currently underway will list environmental resources that are required to be preserved and unique area habitat that we would want to preserve for its natural character and contributions to the area ecosystem. More information about mitigation will be available as we move through the environmental review process.

Why Interchanges Can Be a Good Thing

As regular readers know, I talk about different aspects of the Connector project in this blog–anything from upcoming meetings to planning/design elements to general transportation issues. As the planning and design process moves forward, I’d like to focus on some of the specific design elements that may be part of the final project.

One element that likely will be included in the final design is traffic interchanges. Interchanges frequently get a bad rap, as many people assume interchanges will create safety issues for non-auto travelers and stand out visually from the surrounding landscape/environment. Every interchange is different and addresses different issues. Some are, yes, visually unappealing, but one of the primary goals of an interchange is to improve safety for all travelers. In fact, interchanges offer many benefits:

- Interchanges allow for more continuous flow of traffic because cross-traffic is separated, reducing the potential for conflicts between autos, pedestrians and bicyclists if properly designed

- Travel should be easier for pedestrians and bicyclists due to dedicated facilities designed for their mode of travel

- Interchanges reduce pollution from idling cars because traffic flow is improved

- A higher traffic capacity can be managed on a facility roughly the same size as one without an interchange that uses an at-grade intersection

- Safety is enhanced by the reduction in traffic conflict volumes

Many things can be done to make interchanges more visually appealing. The roadway can be sunk so it doesn’t rise 25 feet above an area’s existing grade. Most of the interchanges that would be part of the Connector would be small, because that’s more compatible with the project’s goal to blend in with the overall landscape. Some smaller local interchanges, just to give you an idea, are Business 80 at Fulton Avenue or Business 80 at Watt Avenue. They almost look like overcrossings, with ramps that come down, minimal right of way and a quick transition back into the flow of traffic.

The primary purpose of an interchange with the Connector is to separate the two highest conflicting directions of traffic—cross streets and the Connector. Interchanges are, as to be expected, more expensive than a standard roadway. The cost depends on a variety of factors, such as size, signals, guard rails and turn lanes, among others. More information about possible interchange options and dimensions will be available for review when we get into scoping later this year, so stay tuned.

Social Media and the Connector

You may have noticed from our web site (which we are working to revamp, by the way, so it’s more user-friendly) that the Connector is taking advantage of some social media tools to communicate with our stakeholders. We’re on Twitter (@CapConnector), we have a Facebook page, I’m blogging and we have a YouTube channel (also CapConnector).

Why is a roadway project getting involved in all of this, you might ask? Well, I think the project’s leaders and planners have a responsibility to be the fulcrum of the public debate about the project. I would rather provide information and a forum for discussion than not participate in the discussion. We have the responsibility to provide first-hand information and then let you, the readers, viewers and stakeholders, decide on your position.

Our main goal in using these tools is to get a broader cross-section of people involved. We are actively participating in and sparking conversation, perhaps even raising perspectives and considerations people hadn’t thought of, or demonstrating things that may not be readily visible to someone looking at a line on a map.

We have been charged by the people of the region, through their overwhelming support of the Measure A sales tax renewal, to thoroughly investigate the possibilities and constraints of a Connector facility. We want to make sure that people are involved and don’t have to rely on a statutory process to feel welcome in the process. We want people to feel they helped shape the Connector. A project of this size and scope is so identifiable that it would just plain be wrong if we didn’t gather as many opinions and specifics about who/how the project touches as possible.

For example, we’ve posted a number of new videos on the CapConnector YouTube channel in the past month. We spoke with various community leaders–in public safety, education, business and the general community–about the Connector. Their thoughts and even some of their questions are noted in their videos. Take a look and let us know what you think. And get involved! More opportunities to make your voice heard are coming soon during the scoping process.

The Importance of Multi-Modal Travel in Planning the Connector

The Connector is being planned as a multi-modal transportation facility; that much we know. But why is such importance placed on that aspect of the project? There are a few reasons…

One is that we need to leave our options as open as possible. It’s nearly impossible to predict the life of a facility of this size. We’re planning it with an eye to 2045, which is 35 years in the future. I can remember 35 years ago so it’s not like 35 years is beyond anyone’s horizon, but it’s not crystal clear.

In 35 years, we’re probably going to have some of the same shapes and sizes of transportation we currently use, but there will be different percentages of use for different travel modes. People might embrace alternative modes of transportation more (or less). When building something that carries the weight and significance the Connector does, it’s important to be inclusive and encourage distribution of use.

Cost is another consideration. It’s more cost effective to plan now to construct the Connector to be used for automobiles as well as other uses, such as transit (bus or bus rapid transit), bicycling, walking, horseback riding and perhaps even others we haven’t considered yet. It makes sense to consider all options because a small additional up-front investment should result in a much more user-friendly facility. We obviously want this facility to be used, and to do that, we must strive to offer options. The Connector won’t just connect communities and move commuters; it will also help people connect to recreational activities during the weekend, perhaps even inspiring new recreational activities, and improve awareness of the Sacramento Region as a healthy community.

And of course, another consideration is our responsibility to make the Connector a more comprehensive community asset because it does represent a significant investment in the community. That happens through doing the things I’ve noted above: investing in different modes of travel, making the Connector as attractive and sustainable as we can, and making it identifiable in the community as more than just a transportation facility.

These may seem to be lofty goals, but we hope to make positive impacts in the long run. Let us know how we’re doing as the project moves along.

Intelligent Transportation Systems Mean More Options are Available for Managing Local Transportation

I recently attended a tradeshow on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). This is an emerging field that has the potential to make a huge impact on how traffic is managed and how transportation impacts the environment.

Traditional traffic management is about moving from place to place, ideally as quickly as possible. That’s why there are freeway signs informing you of “congestion ahead” or letting you know the estimated amount of time to reach a particular off ramp. It’s also why there are intersection controls to control the flow of traffic.

Intelligent Transportation developers are looking to influence traffic patterns by providing information and trying to better distribute traffic on roadway systems. Future traffic management may soon be based on environmental issues, such as air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. The show was the first time I’ve seen the possibility of having intersections timed based on current levels of air quality or greenhouse gas emissions along a freeway or local roadway. It means that intersection timing wouldn’t be exclusively based on moving a certain number of vehicles in a certain amount of time, but on how those vehicles were impacting the environment in a particular area and how that impact could be affected by controlling the flow of vehicles.

I’ve said before that people have an ingrained desire for mobility, and that desire can’t be changed by restricting it. If travel is made more difficult, people may complain about it more but there is still a need to travel for work, school, errands and recreation. ITS planners are trying to improve the roadway system, irrespective of whether people think the system should be there or whether they think it encourages undesired growth in an area. The system is there because people use it. If efforts are made to softly influence people and reduce the impacts of travel, it may be possible to “have your cake and eat it too.”

It will be very interesting to see how these developments will change travel across the country, and what elements we may be able to incorporate into the Connector.

Local Impacts of State and Federal Funding Decisions

The last blog shared information about transportation issues facing our nation. However, we didn’t really delve into how funding decisions made by state and federal agencies affect our local transportation projects. There are big impacts, since local projects are predominantly funded from those larger “pots” of money.

A large portion of the funds for transportation projects comes from the federal government. The feds distribute those funds to state Departments of Transportation, which in turn disburse funds to local jurisdictions. That means individual States have a big say in which projects are funded and completed using federal money.

And that can lead to competition between state and local projects. Both states and local jurisdictions have their own transportation programs and both have claims to federal funds. But because there is never enough money to fund all of the projects that are planned, there are times when local projects don’t receive full funding. It is times like these, when money is tight at all levels, when local projects may suffer because State projects take precedence.

The Connector is in an interesting situation in terms of all of these funding decisions because it doesn’t really fall into a formal project “category.” As a large local capital project, it’s somewhat of an anomaly. There may be local projects that are a fraction of the size of the Connector, and state projects that are comparable in size, but there are almost no similar 35-mile local facilities.

Many large capital projects like the Connector are state projects that have a built-in force behind them, funding them and moving them forward. Because the Connector is a local project, it doesn’t have the high level of visibility that a state project would have with those making State funding decisions. That’s fine to a certain extent, since the majority of the initial project funding comes from local taxes, but presents challenges when we have to battle it out for higher-level funding. It means we have to be more creative to find the funding to complete the project—and that can be a very important challenge.

Transportation News and Challenges at the National Level

You may or may not be following the many transportation issues facing our nation. We all know there are local transportation issues, but decisions being made at the national level affect us too.

For instance, a new, six year transportation bill is being proposed by Congress. This bill has the potential to be significantly different than previous transportation bills. In this bill, there is an increased focus on environmentally-friendly and sustainable transportation. There are also elements of the bill that address transportation and land use efficiencies. It will be very interesting to see whether people embrace the bill and the changes it represents, or whether these elements will be diluted once special interests make their positions known.

Another issue facing the nation is the Federal Highway Trust Fund. Unless Congress adds billions of dollars over the next two years, all federal highway construction projects will come to a screeching halt. The process for funding the FHTF is broken because the fund’s primary and almost exclusive revenue source is the gasoline tax, which is no longer a good source of sustainable revenue. There are many reasons for that: increases in the miles per gallon (MPG) efficiencies of most vehicles; a reduction in driving due to higher gas prices; the introduction of alternative energies (electric, hydrogen and ethanol vehicles are not taxed at same rate); and recent increases in costs associated with transportation projects.

The biggest questions about transportation projects always center around funding and funding sources. As a nation, we face huge challenges, not only in road building, but also with transit and transit operations. It all takes money and the amounts increase every year. We are facing the possibility that even traditional programs will not secure funding. When even highway construction – the heart and soul of moving people around the country – faces funding challenges, we know we are in the midst of interesting and unusual times.

All of this affects us at the local level. We are facing budget cuts at the State level, which affects County and City funding just when federal funding is being cut. Fortunately the bulk of the Connector’s funding comes from Measure A, so we can thank the wisdom of voters a few years ago for the ability to continue finding a solution to help ease regional congestion.

More on transportation and relating funding issues in future entries. It’s a fascinating and ever-changing topic!

Developing Alternative Connector Alignments

Everyone knows that getting any project, much less a major infrastructure project, from the initial stages through to approval is an extensive and complicated task. As the Connector moves forward, I’d like to highlight a few aspects of the process.

We will soon be moving into the scoping process, in preparation for the development of an Environmental Impact Report and an Environmental Impact Statement. Part of the scoping process is determining the alternative alignments that should be studied. An alternative can be defined as any combination of project elements (number of lanes, transit options, etc.) along with an alignment we would propose to be studied and approved.

Any alternative needs to be a sustainable project-not in the sense of being “green” or environmentally friendly, but in having all of the necessary components that would be needed to define the project and what potential environmental impacts would be. That includes determining the physical footprint of the alternative, which would be used to determine the types of environmental resources that may, directly or indirectly, be in conflict with it. And that helps frame the discussion of the details that would be required in order for that alternative to be built.

Alternatives were initially developed when SACOG started planning the Connector in 2005-2006. There are currently four alignment/route alternatives, and more will likely be developed in the community involvement process. The goal now is to define one or a small number of overall alternatives. There is a wide range of people involved to develop and provide feedback on alternatives: stakeholders, the community, resource agencies, Caltrans, local boards, member jurisdictions, staff, fellow support service agencies like emergency districts, transportation elements like RT and Paratransit, as well as interest groups like bicycle advocacy groups.

This alternative development part of the process will continue most likely until the end of the year, when the JPA Board selects the alternatives to be studied in the environmental documents. I encourage you to get involved in the scoping meetings that will be held later this summer and fall. Check our web site over the next few months for details about those meetings.

How the Connector Will Benefit Goods Movement

One of my recent entries focused on personal movement. This time, I’d like to share information about how the Connector can provide another form of freedom: goods movement.

Our society practically dictates a high standard of living. People want the best of everything, but they also want a bargain. There are many ways companies can provide us with goods at reasonable prices—use “lean” manufacturing, reduce advertising costs, and use efficient transportation to get goods into our hands.

Goods are frequently moved using trucks and large freight haulers, as one way to meet our expectations for availability of those goods at an affordable price. Once purchased from a store, we generally transport those goods in our cars. It’s difficult to go grocery shopping and then ride a bicycle with your bags. It would be nearly impossible to buy a refrigerator and take it on a bus or light rail. There will be trips where we head to the bakery on our bike to pick up a loaf of bread or attend special events using public transit, but we still rely on our cars (and the trucks and freight haulers) to regularly move the goods we need for our daily lives.

South Sacramento County currently has no facility to efficiently move goods from manufacturing to distribution to storefront. Sure, there are existing highways, arterial roads and neighborhood roads…but that means some truck traffic is mixing with school buses and local trips on roads that weren’t meant for that level of traffic.

The Connector will provide a needed link to make goods movement more efficient and (hopefully) cost-effective. By offering another option for local car travel, it will reduce congestion on freeways and improve the efficiency of truck-based transportation. The Connector will also allow people another option when purchasing something at the outlets in Folsom and driving home to Rancho Cordova, or reduce the delivery cost of an appliance or home accessory purchased in El Dorado Hills and delivered to Elk Grove. Regional movement of goods should be improved overall, and that benefits everyone.