Seven Bay Area transportation projects that could untangle congested interchanges, make East Bay BART stations brighter and more comfortable, create better routes for bicyclists and smooth the drive for commuters may be delayed for years, regional transportation officials decided Wednesday.

A committee of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission reluctantly identified a $71.3 million collection of projects to lose financing for at least five years to cope with a massive cut in state funding blamed on plummeting gas tax revenues and a lethargic Legislature that has failed to heed the governor’s call for a transportation funding fix.

The state Transportation Commission in January slashed $754 million from its five-year budget for projects. The Bay Area’s share of the cuts is projected to be $80 million to $96 million, a huge hit that leaves the region unable to keep pace with its growth and go-go economy. More cuts could be coming. Kenneth Kao, an MTC planner, said the agency will work with state officials to make any cuts above the $71 million.

The list of projects tentatively scratched, putting off their funding until at least 2021, includes:

• A new interchange where Interstate 680 meets Highway 4 in Contra Costa County. The interchange would replace an outdated and overwhelmed cloverleaf design that’s snarled with commuters forced to weave in and out of traffic.

• Improvements to the Highway 101/Highway 92 interchange, another traditional cloverleaf that routinely backs up traffic in San Mateo.

• Brighter, more colorful and more spacious BART stations in Alam eda and Contra Costa counties. BART plans to upgrade its 1970s-era stations with brighter colors, new lighting, wider concourses and waiting areas and easier access. Station remodeling plans are in progress at the 19th Street Oakland, downtown Berkeley, El Cerrito Del Norte and C oncord stations.

• Enhanced access from Oakland to the bike path on the Bay Bridge’s east span. A series of trails and lanes is planned to make it safer and easier for bicyclists to pedal to the popular bridge trail.

• A new bicycle and pedestrian bridge over Highway 101 at Adobe Creek in Palo Alto, replacing an underpass that’s flooded as much as half of the year.

• A plan to create Jepson Parkway, a north-south thoroughfare between Fairfield and Vacaville, by connecting and widening existing narrow roads.

• Rehabilitation of Airport Boulevard From Highway 29 to the Napa County Airport in southern Napa County. Work would include repairs, repaving and new bike lanes.

So, despite the thriving economy, tightening traffic and crowded transit, the message to commuters is: Expect less. The chief culprit in the funding loss is the state’s gasoline tax, which has delivered less revenue recently.

The base gas tax is levied as a per-gallon fee, but a portion of it is also tied to the price of fuel, a type of sales tax. As a result, revenues have been hurt by falling gas prices as well as the lower consumption that comes with the emergence of electric and more fuel-efficient cars.

Gov. Jerry Brown called on the Legislature a year ago to come up with a fix for the state’s transportation crisis and even called a special session over the summer.

But lawmakers failed to come up with a plan to raise taxes or fees to close a yawning funding gap. Transportation officials say the state needs an additional $5.7 billion a year to maintain the roads, bridges and other infrastructure that already exist. Any improvements must come on top of that.

Members of the MTC’s programming committee reluctantly approved the list of cuts, which still needs to be ratified by the full commission — but not before expressing their frustration.

“When gas prices go down, it causes driving to go up, which causes more wear and tear on our roads,” said Scott Wiener, a San Francisco supervisor and commission member who’s running for state Senate. “So what do we do? We cut transportation spending. It makes no sense.”

The commission could keep some projects moving by lending the state money, a strategy it has employed in the past. But Steve Heminger, the agency’s executive director, said that was a bad bet since there’s no sign the state will get a windfall healthy enough to pay back the Bay Area.

“It’s a pretty risky proposition,” he said.

The solution to the crisis, he said, lies with the Legislature. Until then, transportation planners simply have to scratch projects for which they expected funding. The state Transportation Commission adopts its final transportation spending plan in May.

Julie Pierce, a commissioner and Clayton city councilwoman, said she has been part of a 25-year effort to replace the I-680/Highway 4 interchange, which causes big traffic backups as drivers weave in and out of the cloverleaf.

The project’s funding plan leans heavily on money from Contra Costa County’s transportation sales tax, she said, even though the interchange is part of the state highway system.

“Many of the things on this list are state highways,” she said. “They’re not supposed to be our responsibility.”

Michael Cabanatuan is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: mcabanatuan@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @ctuan