• A bus transit service is a viable alternative for providing improved access to Yosemite National Park and the Yosemite region in the short term.
  
• A phased approach, which will allow service to be implemented incrementally, is the region's preferred approach.

In addition, the study concluded that rail service may also be viable in the long term, and recommended a rail feasibility study be conducted after completion of the bus implementation study.

In January, 1997, during the initial YARTS study, a severe flood damaged a significant amount of infrastructure in Yosemite Valley and permanently removed a number of camping and parking locations within the Valley. The National Park Service's (NPS) need for a flood recovery plan resulted in a focused land use plan for Yosemite Valley that would implement the goals of the General Management Plan for Yosemite National Park. An initial planning effort, the Valley Implementation Plan has now been expanded into a comprehensive land use plan and environmental study, currently underway, known as the Yosemite Valley Plan. This study, being conducted by the National Park, is independent of the YARTS plan, but will both be informed by the regional transit study and will provide information vital to YARTS implementation.

The combination of regional and federal planning efforts going on in parallel has unfortunately resulted in increasing confusion, especially among local residents with a history of distrust of the Park Service. This distrust led to the accusation that the YARTS process was designed as a "tool" of the Park Service and their stated goal of removing cars from the National Park(4). Madera County resigned its position on the YARTS Management Board in early 1999, after significant protest in that County suggested that the YARTS process was simply a first step in an overall ban on autos in the Valley, which would have an obvious negative impact on local economies.

While the loss of Madera County, and continued protest in some communities has slowed implementation of YARTS service, planning is on-going for a May, 2000 demonstration of a regional transit service.

Planning for a regional transit service among a skeptical constituency has been a significant challenge for the local elected officials who comprise the majority of the YARTS Management Board. To ensure local residents that the solution to this national problem would not negatively impact local communities, the Management Board adopted Planning Principles earlier in 1999.

Among the key principles included in this document:

The YARTS planning effort represents a unique forum for cooperation between the National Park and its neighbors in the areas of transportation and access. This is a major departure from past efforts in the region which often resulted in an "us-them" struggle between gateway communities and the Park Service, and among the various gateways themselves. By speaking with one voice the gateway communities have influenced park service policies.

The YARTS planning process has recommended and the park has adopted several key policies that will enhance YARTS chances for success:

A definition of transit service has been adopted that is distinct from tour bus operations. Tour buses are viewed as part of the congestion problem at Yosemite because they stop and idle at various attractions throughout the park, unloading, loading and waiting for their group to return. The definition of a "transit" trip includes regular stops outside of the park on a reliable schedule, the ability to board the bus without a reservation, and, most important to the park, a "stop, drop, and go" operation that does not involve waiting or idling along the way.

Transit buses will be given "privileges" that are not given to either tour buses or cars at the National Park. Beyond adopting the definition of a transit bus, the Park has indicated that transit operators will be "sanctioned" or permitted only through the YARTS process. Transit operators will receive priority access to the park. Their "privileges" will include: elimination of the $300 vehicle entrance fee currently charged to tour buses; the ability to "jump queues" at entrance gates; reduced entrance fees for individuals to no more than $3 per person and $6 per group; and the ability to stop at key attraction points throughout the park and Valley.

An employee transportation program will be a high priority for the Park Service and its concessionaire. Public input strongly suggested that the local communities would not accept a transit service for its guests that did not also serve to remove employee cars from the park. An additional impact of the Yosemite Valley Plan is likely to be a reduction of employee housing units in the Valley, as well as a substantial reduction in the number of parking spaces available to commuting employees, making alternative transportation a critical part of the park's own plan. While no final decision has been made, the Park is committed to providing a comprehensive approach to employee transportation, making Yosemite a leader among national parks in this area.

The Park is committed to contributing to the funding of YARTS and to its success. Over time, the Park has come to see YARTS as an integral part of its future. As demand for access to the park continues to increase despite limited parking and automobile infrastructure, YARTS has been recognized as the only way to maintain visitation levels without further damaging the environment. The National Park Service is committed to the YARTS process, and has agreed to provide funding support for YARTS to ensure its success. Few National Parks in the country have funded transportation projects outside of their boundaries.

This level of commitment has substantially changed the relationships between the gateway counties and the National Park. While a few years of cooperation can not eliminate a history of competing goals, the YARTS process offers the promise of a closer relationship between the Park and its neighbors.

Developing a transportation plan for the Yosemite region is a substantial challenge that goes beyond geography and the number of jurisdictions involved. The rural gateway counties have no history of public transit service, except for very small focused transit systems that cater primarily to elders and persons with disabilities. In fact, many local residents moved to the mountain communities to avoid urban ills they associate with public transit

Other concerns raised by the public in numerous workshops and input sessions include:

Concern over "big government" approaches to solving problems. Even those local constituents who believe congestion and access to Yosemite is a regional problem are skeptical about heavy handed government solutions. They fear that even a small transit service will be a precursor to a larger system that will require riders to leave their cars behind, and will ultimately make Yosemite less appealing as a tourist destination. A common refrain says that "if it was a good idea, business would do it", and since there is only a very small transit market today, transit must not be a good idea. Local residents expressed concern about grant funding or public investment in what they see as a largely private concern, and they expressed a belief that local jurisdictions would ultimately be made to pay for the program.

Environmental Concern. Local residents are concerned that large bus fleets, especially diesel powered fleets will have a negative impact on local environments. The public cites recent California EPA findings which identify diesel exhaust particulate emissions as a carcinogen.

Economic Concern. Local business owners expressed concern that YARTS would ultimately become the only way to access the park, and suggest that the YARTS process is a tool of the park service's plan to ban all cars from the Yosemite Valley. Under these circumstances, business owners are concerned that visitors will stay away from the region, rather than make the trip by transit.

The plan for transit service in the Yosemite region reflects the input received from the public and balances their concerns with the need to meet the objectives established for YARTS. The result is a proposal for a two-year demonstration program, which will begin operation during the summer, 2000. Under this proposal, YARTS will not be the direct provider of transit services, but will serve as a "brokering" agency, establishing service criteria and providing subsidies as available to encourage higher levels of service and lower fares than would be offered by private operators on their own. The service will actually be provided by the private sector, who will negotiate with YARTS to determine the final schedules and other operating details.

The demonstration project plan provides minimum and maximum service levels expected to be operated during the two-year demonstration period. Minimum service levels presume that no funding is available to subsidize service or reduce fares. A very modest program could still be offered at "market rates" providing connecting services from Amtrak and serving employees. Maximum service levels are estimated based on subsidy levels that would reduce the cost per visitor to $5 for a round trip, including the park's gate fee, and would eliminate the cash fare for employees. Higher levels of service can be offered under this scenario, as demand will significantly increase.

The final level of service on each corridor will be negotiated with the actual service providers through a request for proposal (RFP) process. RFPs are expected to be issued during the fall of 1999 for a summer 2000 service implementation.

Figure 3 presents the service characteristics for minimum and maximum service levels on each of the corridors that will receive demonstration transit service. Service will be offered at bus stops identified by each jurisdiction, located conveniently to lodging sites in the gateway communities. The initial target market will be lodgers who can leave their car at their lodging location while visiting the park. Employees will also be targeted, especially on Highway 140 where concentrations of employees exist. Highway 120 West is not included in the demonstration plan because Tuolumne County has not identified bus stop locations at this time. Should those stops be added, additional transit service would be offered from Groveland into the Park.