Wednesday, August 9, 2017

Amador Gets Stiffed Temporarily?

On 2/17/17 I posted Amador Gets Stiffed https://markbennett1.blogspot.com/2017/02/amador-gets-stiffed.html regarding the possible multi modal terminal adjacent to Sacramento Valley Station/Amtrak that would connect with Amador Transit, buses from five or so other counties surrounding Sacramento, Greyhound and others. This present lack of inter-connectability caused Amador County to spend $68K for a study to seek remedies and prompted my writing of Amador Gets Stiffed. That article was caustic, based upon my disgust with the missed opportunity of the terminal’s inclusion into the then generous Obama stimulus for the station renovation. I attributed this to the attitudes and desires of those involved based upon my participation when a planner in Sacramento.

An opportunity for an update arose on 6/14/17 when I attended the Riverfront Renaissance Community Event as an alternate for Amador Transit. One Sacramento planner remembered me from my prior involvements. I spoke with him, other planners, news reporters and politicians. Former Sacramento mayor Heather Fargo told me that Greyhound was purposely so located to be on city property because the city can terminate their lease and force a move. I was also assured that all buses would be available in a future intermodal facility to be built north of the Sac Valley Depot in the Railyards development. This was also new, since I knew that plan well having designed its transit system

And while I don’t doubt the sincerity of those I spoke with, the Railyards Specific Plan is an adopted, but unfunded, plan. When this will happen, and in what final form, is unknown. So presently, the best approach appears to be remaining vigilant. Therefore, I began the official process of making sure Amador County was considered in the facility’s planning. At the TAC it was decided that SSTAC (Social Services Transportation Advisory Council), of which I am a member, should formally ask the ACTC (Amador County Transportation Commission). On 8/3/17 they were asked to: “… (to) appoint a Sacramento Multimodal Facility Planning Representative to facilitate inclusion in future intermodal plans along with our neighboring counties…This endeavor would require the Amador County Transportation Commissioners’ approval of staff time to assert Amador County’s desire to be part of this proposed facility, to maintain contact with the project planners and stakeholders, to provide commenting when necessary and time to carry out any other tasks relating to representation.”

During the ensuing discussion Commissioner (and County Supervisor) Brian Oneto wisely asked if this would cost us anything. This is important consideration, and I answered that I didn’t know. I also stated that using the terminal would shorten the present route’s mileage thereby reducing operating costs along with likely increased farebox revenue. It would also avoid the far more costly route extension to Greyhound suggested in the recent Inter City consultant study.

The commission passed a draft resolution for approval at their next meeting which stated: “…to appoint Ms. Platt as a representative to attend, at her discretion, Sacramento Multimodal Facility Planning meetings and for the ACTC Executive Director to appoint April Miller from Amador Transit or other designee at this discretion to serve as alternate.” While this is certainly a step in the right direction, there are many unanswered questions. What are, if anything, the other counties and carriers doing to assert their interest? What is the status of this project within Sacramento politics? Since there doesn’t appear to be a functioning stake holder’s group, who will instigate this?
 
Copyright 2017, Mark L. Bennett