FROM: Ostroff Associates

DATE: December 10, 2020

RE: Transportation Advisory Panel: Pubic Transportation/Smart Growth Roundtable

1
Nick Sifuentes: Developing complementary transportation and smart growth policies are essential
to achieving the goals laid out in the CLCPA. On road light duty automobiles and heavy-duty
vehicles like buses produce nearly 60% of emissions within the transportation sector in NY. There
are already a lot of initiatives under way to help curb emissions some include, deploying PVE
charging stations along heavily used routes and full fleet conversions to zero emission buses. The
State can advance various measures to help in the reduction of carbon emissions in support of the
CLCPA. These measures can help prepare NY for zero emission vehicles and enhance the availability
of a diverse portfolio of transportation options including but not limited to high quality public
transportation, walking and biking, housing and other land use considerations.

One of the most challenging issues in balancing transportation orientated land use and
development is providing and enhancing last mile connectivity. This is the case for public
transportation services but also for-hire transportation networking corporations and
freight networks, based on your experience how can NYS and local communities bridge this
critical gap?

Sam Schwartz: When it comes to passengers, micro- transit is something they need to look at.
Chariot in NYC has walked away from that. Micro-mobility is the other thing.

Art Guzzetti: A national trend in the pandemic is that national transit agencies have shifted to core
roots which makes the first mile and the last mile more important. A specific idea is the rise in
biking and dedicating infrastructure to biking. Should make sure transit stations have good bike
transit integration.

Rob Padgette: Capital Corridor Service based in California, has about 10% of customers who access
their services with bikes. Have e-bike lockers and the ability to have bikes on trains. Can only
change land use so much.

Jennifer Dotson: Hearing a lot of different ideas which is key. Started in the carsharing space and
now expanded to the bike/walk advocacy space. Wants to put last mile in quotes, in upstate not
actually talking about a mile, talking about how to get to a hospital which is miles outside of town.
Carsharing is a big piece of this.

Kate Fillin-Yeh: Need to make sure it is easy to get to basic necessities like the grocery store and
make sure its comfortable and safe for people to bike and walk. The other thing to flag is there have
been advances in last mile delivery for freight with cargo bikes, this is for moving smaller items and
proving to be cheaper and easier.

Justin Booth: One of the biggest challenges is maintenance when it comes to issues like snow –
sidewalks not being shoveled or a lack of bus stations. Seeing maintenance projects happening
every 10-15 years with capital funding, need more resources and funding.

Dotson: The State DOT can look more broadly and not just at vehicle throughput, this could filter
down from leadership to the engineers’ localities are working with, then what seems like small
tweaks becomes easier.

Robert Shibley: Should be planning for the infrastructure and maintenance that can make utilizing
last mile services easier.

2
Scott Bogren: Seamlessness when it comes to putting all these pieces together in a way that makes
sense for customers is really important right now.

Sifuentes: On the idea of making it easier to get to transit stations and the idea this work can
be done through small tweaks, wonders if anyone has thoughts on how to do this? How to
make the first and last mile more comfortable and easier for people, in both rural and urban
areas?

Dotson: Sometimes have to ask the neighborhood and it could look different for each area. In Ithaca
do not have huge transit stations but do have high ridership.

Fillin-Yeh: Bringing in the community piece will be essential in what they do. There has been
experimentation working to build out bike lanes and sidewalks, pretty rapidly. There are a wide
variety of other actions they can do to help in this area like expanding bike services. Do not need the
same thing in every place.

Guzzetti: Should take easiest app people use and duplicate that experience.

Padgette: They manage 170 inner-city rail corridors, one of the things they are working on is the
California Integrated Travel Program which is intended to use existing technologies to let people
plan trips in real time. Working on real time GTFS data and integrated ticketing. If the goal is to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the goal should be to get people to the stations to use mass
transit and not to get hung up on the small amounts of emissions getting them there.

Bogren: When it comes to wayfinding, they do not always show people how to move in an urban
area. In the rural space its often an issue of knowing if the systems are even in place.

Sifuentes: Want to touch on access, need to make sure that people not only know how to use
the system but that they can access the system, this is important for the equity question.
Electrifying public transit is only part of the solution, need to expand transit systems. What
can local municipalities and the State do to make mass transit more accessible?

Schwartz: When looking at NYC, the real estate industry was behind a lot of transit and there were
private companies related to the transit and real estate companies. Value capture is a good way of
encouraging mass transit in areas where they can have both development and increase transit. The
BQX is a good example of an area being served by transit, the private sector is willing to put up a lot
of funds through real estate taxes and other revenue raisers. Involving the private sector,
particularly the real estate sector, is vital.

Justin Booth: In WNY a large part of the issue they have is due to sprawl, many of the jobs being
expanded are in areas that are difficult to get to via mass transit. Need to make sure that jobs are
being placed in areas that are accessible. Land use needs to be tied into transit development and
policies.

Guzzetti: There was a trend before the pandemic when it came to planning for transit, the plans
were to build back better. Now its time to reimagine the networks to make sure there is
accessibility. Also need to reimagine networks and take into consideration that stations are there
for everyone, young and old and of all abilities. Should be designing the system with the user in
mind and not as an afterthought.

3
Jaqi Cohen: During the early days of the pandemic Amazon employees on Staten Island were
demanding private buses because they were being crammed onto bus and MTA service was not
coming frequently enough. Thought that was an opportunity for the transit agency to redistribute
and increase service. This is a time they should be reimagining the way service is provided.

Fillin-Yeh: There’s a question of why people don’t take transit, many think it’s going to take too long
and is inconvenient. Should be thinking how to reimagine a system that is quick and convenient. A
fear of having to wait for service is a big prohibiting factor.

Schwartz: AN IKEA store in Brooklyn changed where they placed their bus stop to the front of the
store to increase accessibility for customers while linking it to other amenities such as bathrooms
and connected it to the ferry. This made it more comfortable for riders which in turn increased
ridership.

Booth: The challenge upstate is they do not have the congestion to encourage the private sector to
move in the direction they desire. The only state that has really engaged in this is California by
removing auto delay in their metrics. Until they change the metrics in their policies, they will not be
able to convince the private sector to change. Need to redesign the way they plan for transit; it is
easier to build in the greenfield and provide parking.

Fillin-Yeh: The metrics might seem like minor details but they are the driving force behind the
policies they are putting in place.

Padgette: The biggest difference between the east and west coast is that on the west coast GHG
emissions are always front and center of the conversations. Most of the funding he relies on comes
from discretionary programs where the reduction of GHGs is the criteria used when a decision is
made. The technology push is also there, going to zero emissions fleets, even for locomotives by
2035.

Shibley: Agrees with what is being said, especially on the importance of metrics. If you have a broad
regional plan you do not have the municipal powers to implement it but if you put in place a local
plan with the metrics in place, you have empowered the municipalities to make more of these
changes.

Bogren: Need to look at a variety of metrics – healthcare, human services, senior services, etc., need
to look at the outcomes of these metrics and where people are going.

Schwartz: Should be looking at the State and local budgets. The metro NYC region has a $25 billion
budget between the State and City not counting the MTA, but just a fraction goes towards
treatments like clearing sidewalks, bike lanes, micro-mobility, and other last mile programs. A
whole review of the budget and budget process is necessary. One of the big questions is always
where funding is coming from.

Cohen: Important to relay metrics to the public but they are all guilty of not breaking the data down
in a way the public can understand. The majority of the public does not actually care about transit.
They are focus on getting from point A to point B and doing so safely, need to focus on this.

Sifuentes: This is good, the panel needs to be hearing about which metrics to use to drive
their recommendations. There is a frequent criticism of public transportation that if you are
not a frequent user, the systems are difficult to use. How do we improve this? How do we

4
make wayfinding and use of the system easier for users? How can they help people move
from one mode to another? An example being getting your bike on a train.

Cohen: One thing is to design systems to help those with disabilities and employ people with
disabilities to do this. Need to make sure there is accessibility to these systems, NYC transit is
virtually inaccessible, some of this is a lack of infrastructure. There have been wayfinding measures
that have been put in place to help people that are new to town. Should also examine fares and
streamlining them, there is a lack of integration between systems. The Metro North is one system
while the subway another, this is problematic.

Padgette: California Caltrans looked into this issue of fares and found credit card companies have
also been interested in space to increase transitions. Their program to integrate was funded
through cap-and-trade funding.

Dotson: Thinking where transit is the answer, from the consumer side, people are often looking at
where they are going next, not just train to train, could be from bus to bike. Need to make sure they
are part of the same system, carsharing is part of this.

Fillin-Yeh: Likes targeting towards the people who need the informational services. This is big part
of ADA planning. Another thing to add to that list is frequency, don’t want to make people wait half
an hour between connections.

Bogren: From a consumer there needs to be a focus on travel training, broadening that approach
and helping people learn how to use their systems. Have applied this for older adults and those
with disabilities.

Booth: Thinks there is too much of a dependency on the public sector, need to push the private
sector in many of these areas. In Buffalo they instituted the Buffalo Green Code – unified
development coordinates and created minimum parking requirements in the city, now have a
development policy that makes it so developers have to include other methods of accessibility
besides vehicles in their developments. Changing zoning codes to influence the private sector in
addition to education. An example of this is the Buffalo Medical Campus, educated people on
different ways to get to the campus and saw over 50% of people traveling to that campus, switch
from driving to other methods.

Sifuentes: There is often a barrier to public transit use in the current land use confines where
the availability of amenities to support trip changing does not exist in a lot of places. What
role should commercial activity or the private market play in enhancing services at and near
transit hubs – daycares, dry cleaners, markets, etc.? And how can government facilitate those
types of activities?

Dotson: Thinking about negative incentives for greenfield developments which drives real estate in
many of those locations.

Kevin Law: Thinks there is an opportunity for trip changing programs which makes sense for places
like Long Island, where they have rail systems and bus routes and they do not always go to places
that have commercial activities. Have opportunities and incentives for the private sector to play a
role in connecting people and places.

5
Sifuentes: Are there any other ideas on making trip changing easier and what amenities
should be included in transit?

Shibley: There are a lot of layers here and answers they already know. The question should also be
what do they not have? They need metrics and information about how to implement things. Every
location will have different needs, they do not have the tools to really understand how to make site
specific decisions in terms of really broad “knock it out of the park” generalities. Need to work at all
levels at once, what they know in general, how do they apply it in a specific context, and what do
they not know and have to look into. They are least confident in knowing what to do with the
market forces impacting all of their transportations systems.

Fillin-Yeh: If talking at a structural level they’re talking about zoning and tax incentives. They have
the ability to create the playing field and market and they should be doing that. Wants to administer
those tools towards things they want and care about in ways that actually reduces GHG. If talking
about land use should focus on business putting employees, stores, and customers in areas already
being served by transit.

Guzzetti: The question used trip changing but could frame it as the trip not taken, some of these
areas are walkable and so a trip isn’t needed at all, this could contribute the most to their goals if
people didn’t have to use any energy.

Dotson: Likes the concept of metrics because it brings them back to their first purpose. Has seen
regularly in small cities transit is used to solve land use problems. They can’t solve a lot of these
problems strictly via transit, land use is a huge issue. There are talks of making sure transit comes
within a certain distance of a building but a lot of buildings are being built in inaccessible areas.

Booth: If they do not count pedestrians and bikers, they will not be successful, they count cars every
three years, all modes should be considered.

Schwartz: In Barcelona they found half the trips being taken were done via walking and biking
which changed their approach. Should change Department of Transportation to the Department of
Mobility or the Department of Mobility and Accessibility. Should really push for communities
planned around being able to walk.

Sifuentes: Passenger and dedicated revenue streams are at an all time low. What new and
additional financing strategies should public transit and passenger rail be looking at to help
system recovery?

Schwartz: Transit has taken a huge hit, in terms of recovery, public transit is at 30% in NYC while
cars are at 90% and trucks at 102%. Part of this is because the CBD is not busy because of work-
from-home and there has been a fear of transit. Wants to point to a world-wide study that found no
clusters can be found in transit. There are a lot of misconceptions that need to be tackled. Thinks
people have used COVID as an excuse to not put congestion pricing in place. Could implement fair
tolling, fares will have to be raised while still protecting low-income New Yorkers. Have to raise
revenue and not cut services.

Law: Need to look at things pre-COVID, during COVID and post COVID. Before COVID people
understood the need and were looking into investing into public transit, this is part of the reason
congestion pricing was approved. At that time, systems were at record highs in terms of ridership
then that collapsed, at one point 95% of the metro north users were not using it and this has only

6
recovered 30%. No one wants to see fare increases to solve this problem but also can not cut
services. This is an issue that really needs federal funding. Any new programs will be viewed in
terms of revenue. Thinks once there is a vaccine, they will see a better rebound. The MTA was
looking at congestion pricing to raise funds for improvements in the system.

Guzzetti: A lot of other cities have instituted congestion pricing before the pandemic and thinks
support will come back. Agrees federal funding is needed.

Shibley: There has been a focus on metro areas to take care of the issues being talked about. Should
be asking where the population is globally which is toward higher density metro areas. Thinks
there will be an increase of population to urban areas. There needs to be a federal policy that layers
over a state policy. There needs to be more federal oversight for funding, the state planning is
essential but regional planning is where fine grain metrics will be found.

Schwartz: The last time there was massive planning for much of the State was during the Great
Depression. This current slump will eventually end and the areas with shovel ready plans will be
those that get funds. A lot of the planning they’ve talked about is low-cost policy, they should be
making those plans even if they do not know where the funding is coming from.

Dotson: Agrees but not all localities especially in smaller municipalities have the departments for
planning. There are a lot of people who are not being serviced that need to be taken into
consideration. Equity is also a huge issue with many people being pushed out of accessible areas.

Sifuentes: Aside from access when transit is available, what can the State do to ensure
benefits from transit and smart growth are targeted towards the communities who have
suffered the most from our current transportation choices?

Booth: One of the things they’ve been looking at in Buffalo is access, 30% of households do not have
cars so they rely more heavily on walking and biking. Have seen an increase in crashes with
bicyclist and pedestrians, seeing this happening in communities which have been chronically
disinvested in for decades. Need to examine how people are traveling in those communities and
listen to what they need to support them. If sidewalks are not plowed around bus stops it becomes
an issue to use the bus. Investments need to be used to make people’s moving lives easier.

Cohen: Agrees it is important to actually listen to what these communities need. Constantly trying to
find ways to make these improvements but sometimes members of those communities feel they are
not being heard and raise opposition to advancements, need to make sure they’re listening to the
communities. Approaching the projects as a collaborative process is a better method.

Bogren: During the pandemic they have been hearing a lot about essential trips, thinks that should
point them to where they should be looking for the equity question.

Fillin-Yeh: Should create a metric to look at equity. What does an equal access metric look like? A lot
of places have figured out these metrics. The safety piece is huge, let’s talk about those issues.

Schwartz: Should be engaging the private sector, a lot of what they have done is focus on public
transit that is being subsidized. Should be exploring other formulas than what they have
traditionally done. Micro-transit has been reimagined all over the world – should be providing this
to low-income communities.

7
Fillin-Yeh: That is an infrastructure issue too, before the type of vehicle is chosen they should be
asking what other factors there are to consider to provide convenient and affordable service.

Dotson: In some area it is not a question of frequency it is a question of if there is transit at all.
Micro-transit is an option but so is bikeshare, they lost their bikeshare right in the beginning of the
pandemic. Wants to see public transit be engaged in these conversations that are beyond their silo.

Law: Thinks smart growth and other concepts that can tackle both social justice as well as climate
and transportation issues should be explored. When infrastructure was first put into place a lot of it
was done in a way to exclude minority neighborhoods, people have become enlightened on these
issues. Another area that can be problematic is sprawl which was designed before the realities of
climate change were understood.

Bogren: CTAA has done a lot of work in engaging different communities, those that have been
disadvantaged, those with older adults and those with disabilities, in developing mobility on
demand. Have done this when it comes to traditional transit and modes, have not done so much
when it comes to more modern approaches. Have some projects around the country which are
attempting to engage the public in new ways around what they want to see. Thinks that is a good
way to get towards equity.

Shibley: The structure of REDCs have organized their thinking into a different fashion, started
recognizing more rural issues through this process. Where things go matters. As they work on State
policy, the process of how REDCs work and the interconnectedness of regions is something they
should be examining. Also need to look at past programs and avoid failures in those programs such
as avoiding discrimination built into programs.

Guzzetti: Wants to add affordability to the discussion of equity, the affordability to access in general.

Sifuentes: Land use policies are slow to change, have spoken about how to speed up that
process and make them more inclusive. What other policies or actions should the State be
taking to make developments that support low carbon options in the near term or options
that make walking and biking more attractive?

Law: If there is an important project that addresses specific state goals the State (through an
agency) should seek lead agency status; the way projects get bogged down is in the SEQR process
causing projects to take years to be approved and this is usually done at the local level.

Ben Crowther: People will choose the service which is faster or cheaper or both. When it comes to
road expansions or building new road and creating demands for those roads, transit cannot
compete in that environment. Need to be asking in terms of impacts what their end goals are when
talking about expanding roads – in terms of smart growth, environmental impact or equity impacts.

Booth: Need to change NYS SEQR process. Has been a constant issue whether you are talking about
highway projects in Buffalo or rural projects. The focus has been how you can move more cars from
point A to point B. Until they examine other import issues they’ve discussed during the roundtable
and take the focus away from automobiles he does not want the State to take the lead on SEQR
process. Need to rethink about and look at the processes and funding mechanisms they’re currently
using.

8
Schwartz: Thought SEQR would be a great planning tool and help improve the environment when it
was first started, what it turned out to be is a legal document lawyers will use to decided on
planning elements, some good points but it is a failure.

Dotson: In the carsharing world they have run into insurance problems, have lost two to four major
carsharing services. There have also been tax issues, 20% tax on car sharing because its considered
rentals, and their users are mostly low income so this is a problem.

Sifuentes: To summarize, have heard a lot of ideas about going back to first principles – going
back to mobility being a driving force in planning. Looking at metrics being used and
thinking about planning and engaging communities in the planning process. When it comes
to metrics, should be focusing on DMT and GHGs first and think about metrics differently
putting elements of health, sustainability and accessibility first. When it comes to
investment need to look at impacts from start to end. Affordable and equity planning is
essential, move away and undue from discriminatory planning of the past. The need for new
funding sources is paramount, it is also time to be ambitious. Should not only be planning for
now but also for the future but to do it in an equitable way.