Congestion in San Francisco Monitoring and Management October 3, 2019 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Congestion in San Francisco

Monitoring and Management

October 3, 2019

Presentation Outline

2

Congestion in San Francisco: now and in the future TNCs and Congestion Impacts on Muni Policy Recommendations

3

300,000 600,000 900,000 1,200,000 1,500,000 1980 2015 2050 Population Jobs

SF Population and Employment 1980 – 2050

We are Growing

4

Where Are We Growing?

Treasure Island Transit Center District Plan Central SoMa The Hub Mission Bay Pier 70 Potrero HOPE SF Potrero Power Station Parkmerced Balboa Reservoir Schlage Lock HOPE SF Sunnydale Executive Park

Candlestick Point

Hunters Point Shipyard India Basin HOPE SF Hunters View Mission Rock

Based on adopted plans, policies, and entitlements 2015-2050 Change in SF Population and Employment Density

Traffic is bad — and it’s getting worse

Weekday PM peak speed, 2017

Traffic speeds have been declining

Average auto speeds 2006 – 2017

SFCTA, Congestion Management Program 2017

6

But transit speeds are relatively stable*

Average transit speeds 2011 – 2017

7

SFCTA, Congestion Management Program 2017

*thanks to investments in transit priority streets.

Auto to transit ratio has improved

Auto/transit speed ratio 2011 – 2017

8

SFCTA, Congestion Management Program 2017

TNCs & Congestion

9

Source: SFCTA “TNCs Today” 2017 TNC: Transportation Network Company

10 Guiding Principles for Emerging Mobility

Safety Transit Congestion Sustainability Equitable Access Accountability Labor Collaboration Financial Impact Disabled Access Adopted by the SFCTA and SFMTA boards.

TNC trips by Time‐of Day and Day‐of Week

AM peak PM peak

CONTEXT

Emerging Mobility

13

Miles per hour

Change in Speeds by Time of Day for all roadways in San Francisco

Congestion Gets Worse, Auto Speeds Decline

SF‐CHAMP

14

Transit is More Crowded

18% 8% 31% 45% 3% 3% 11% 11% 18% 23% 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000

2015 2050 2015 2050 2015 2050 2015 2050 2015 2050

Transbay service

Not crowded Crowded

Average Weekday Passenger Hours by Crowding Level

18% 8% 31% 45% 3% 3% 11% 11% 18% 23%

50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000

20152050 20152050 20152050 20152050 20152050

SF‐CHAMP

15

Transit is More Crowded

15% 19% 24% 32% 50,000 100,000 150,000 2015 2050 2015 2050 Not Crowded Crowded

Not crowded Crowded

Average Weekday Passenger Hours by Crowding Level – Muni

SF‐CHAMP

16

Transit is More Crowded

Muni Bus Muni Rail Regional Transit 2050 AM Passenger Crowding Level

SF‐CHAMP

Congestion increases operating costs

As congestion increases in areas where transit does not have traffic priority measures, transit service becomes slower and more expensive to provide.

Travel Time (Minutes) Buses Required Annual Cost 30

$3.9 million

45

$5.9 million

60

$7.9 million

75

$9.9 million EXAMPLE: Cost to Provide 10‐Minute Bus Frequency, 6 AM – 12 AM, daily

Assumes operating cost of $200/hour per vehicle. Actual costs vary by mode. Travel time and cost increase together

Muni On‐Time Performance

Muni Bunching and Gaps

Muni Forward produces travel time savings

• Muni Forward projects generally

improve travel time by 10% or more

• Over 30 miles implemented to date
• Examples:
• Church Street: 15%
• 5R Fulton Rapid: 9‐12%
• Mission: 13%
• 16th Street: 10%
• Potrero: 20%
• Two‐Way Haight: Over 20%
• Sansome: Over 20%

Mission Street Muni Forward

• In 2016, SFMTA added transit only lanes, required right turns, stop consolidation, left turn

restrictions, and right turn pockets to improve Muni reliability and safety

• Travel times reduced by up to 2 minutes but riders perceived a 10‐minute savings
• As a result, ridership went up by 4,500 boardings per day in this corridor

22

Potrero Avenue Muni Forward

• In 2018, SFMTA completed improvements
• n Potrero Avenue to improve Muni

reliability

• Improvements include red lane, boarding

islands, signal priority, stop consolidation, plus pedestrian and bike safety upgrades

• These treatments improved travel times by

up to 2 minutes

• Along with other improvements, this has

led to a 38% increase in ridership on the 9 and 9R

Delay Hot Spots

• Muni Forward covers most but not all

delay “hot spots”

• Spot improvements can fill in the gaps
• We are mapping the 10 slowest Muni

segments

• Next: develop plan to speed up Muni

at each of them, such as turn pockets, queue jumps, signal timing changes, etc.

Top 10 PM Peak hot spots for delay

Congestion Problems for Muni

• 1. Speed
• 2. Reliability
• 3. Crowding
• 4. Conflicts

25

What’s working?

• 1. Muni Forward / Red Lanes
• 2. More and larger vehicles
• 3. Transportation Sustainability Program including

TDM requirements

26

What do we need next?

• 1. MORE Muni Forward / Red Lanes
• 2. Close the equity gap
• 3. Curb management
• 4. Pricing projects
• 5. New mobility permitting
• 6. More funding for transit

27

PRICING STUDY:

Downtown Congestion Pricing

Thank you. Any Questions?

sfcta.org

For reference only

30

2010 Congestion Pricing Study

What scenarios would be feasible and effective? What improvements should be part of the package? What are the potential benefits and impacts?

31 31

    

PRICING STUDY:

US101 to I‐280 Express Lanes

M anaged Lanes eval uat ed i n t hi s s t udy M anaged Lanes now under cons t r uct i

• n

M anaged Lanes now under cons t r uct i

• n

2010 RECOMMENDATION

Northeast Cordon

33

Proposed program:

$3 toll to cross cordon during peak Discounts & subsidies:

• Zone resident
• Low‐income HH
• Bridge toll payers

Multimodal investment program

2010 RECOMMENDATION

Northeast Cordon

34

Benefits:

12% fewer peak period auto trips 21% reduction in vehicle delay 20% – 25% transit speed improvements 16% reduction in Northeast Cordon GHGs 12% reduction in pedestrian collisions Business effects broadly neutral

What’s different since 2010

More growth and congestion TNCs (Uber, Lyft) Even more focus on equity Opportunity for incentives

35

NOW:

New Congestion Pricing Study New stakeholder conversations New equity study Updated analysis and new recommendations

36