HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07071987 - TC.1 To! 'BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM Supervisors R. Schroeder (Chair) & T. Torlakson Contra
County Transportation Committee c�a
DATEI 19 couqy
July 7, 1987
SUBJECT: Transportation Committee June Report and Recommendations
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & sAC;GRotjND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
The Transportation Committee recommends that the Board adopt the
following:
1 . Authorize the Chair of the Board to send a letter to BART
recognizing the progress BART has made in supporting transit
extensions in Contra Costa County and to request that BART
aggressively pursue the AB 842 funds available to them.
2. That the Board direct the Department of Public Works staff to
take the Draft Interim Countywide Area of Benefit ordinance
through the normal process for review and comment and as part of
that process that the Transportation Planning Division staff
review and make recommendations to the Transportation Committee
on the appropriateness of the interim ordinanqe. 1,
3. That the Budget Committee consider adding and funding the
following items as a part of the FY 1987/88 Community
Development Department Transportation Planning Division budget:
a. Parking study for downtown Martinez. (The Board
already acted on April 21, 1987 to allocate
funding to the FY 1987/88 budget for this item) . ($15,000)
b. Continuation of the 30-Z line service. This
service is funded yearly by four transit
agencies (BART, AC Transit, CCCTA, and WestCAT)
and the County. The total funding including the
County' s share ( 250) is $82,000. ( $20,500 )
c. West County BART station site study. (BART is offer-
ing to match the requested $5,000 with $55 ,000 ($ 5,000)
upon resolution of the Hercules lawsuit) .
dp8:bo77TC.t07
Orig. Dept.- CDD/TPD
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X_ YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF CO A INISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE HER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON July 7, 1987 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X
*.*.*.The recommendations as noted above were approved with the exception of
Recommendation #2 which referred the Draft Interim County wide Area of
Benefit to the General Plan Congress for review and report back to the
Board.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT If IV AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOESI AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC*. ATTESTED -1-1 July 7, 1987
CAO PHIL BATCHELOR. CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
CDD SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
PWD
D.J. Smith
DEPUTY
M382/7-83
0
d. Rail engineering study for the San Ramon Valley ( $150,000 to
$200,000)
e. Funding subsidy to repay General Services Department
for employee commuter pools using county vehicles.
(Employees who currently commute using a county
vehicle are paying 80% of the cost. ) ( $ 5,000 )
f. Paratransit Coordinating Council marketing
activities ( $ 3 , 000)
4. That the Board authorize the Chair of the Board to sign the
Route 4 Memorandum of Understanding between the County and the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to begin the
environmental process and to proceed with the project
development activities through the preparation of plans,
specifications and estimates and acquisition of necessary rights
of way in order to advance the project' s state of readiness.
5. That the Board authorize the Chair to send letters of thanks to
Senator Alan Cranston and Senator Peter Wilson for their votes
in over-riding the President' s veto of HR ,2.
6. That the Board of Supervisors adopt a position of support for SB
671 (Katz) and AB 2285 (Filante) .
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
1. No direct impact.
2 . The impact of this interim ordinance will be discussed in detail
in a future board order. The lack of an interim ordinance may
temporarily preclude collecting funds for a short time for
infrastructure facilities. It is anticipated that the ordinance
will be revised upon completion of the General Plan Update.
3. The impact of the request on the Transportation Planning
Division budget will result in an additional $198,500 to
$248,500 being allocated to the Division for requested work
activities by the Board members or other departments in the
County. Also, the requested funding will be used to fund the
County' s share of the 30-Z line and to reimburse the General
Services Department for the shortfall in operating costs that
occurs on carpool vehicles being used by County employees.
4. The impact of the County signing this Memorandum of
Understanding is that the County will commit to spending staff
time and money to advance the environmental and engineering work
necessary for the ultimate project on Route 4.
5. Letters of appreciation will not have an impact on the financial
operations of the County.
6. The financial impact of SB 671 (Katz) , if it passes, will be the
availability of additional funds for transportation facilities.
The proposed bill would make available funding via a bonding
mechanism which will be paid for from gas tax revenues. The
limiting factor on this funding is that the County must match
the bond funds with a local match of 500.
The financial impact of AB 2285 (Filante) , if it passes, will be
that a tax incentive for ridesharing using private vehicles in a
private third party ridesharing program will be created. There
is no direct impact on the County' s financial operations.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS/BACKGROUND:
1. The County Transportation Committee agrees with the Board and
thinks it is important that the BART Board of Directors
understand that the County is supportive of their past actions
in advancing transit in Contra Costa County, but that the BART
Board of Directors should aggressively pursue the AB 842 funding
that is available to them.
2. The Board should consider whether or not it wishes to establish
an interim ordinance to establish an interim Countywide Area of
Benefit. Having the proposed interim ordinance go through the
process for review and comment will enable the Board to
ascertain the need of such an ordinance before the General Plan
Update is complete.
3 . The additional funding request is necessary if the work
activities and requests made of Transportation Planning Division
by the Board members and the various departments are to be
included in the FY 1987/88 budget as work activities or ongoing
commitments to programs that are now under the purview of the
Division.
4. The Route 4 project is one of the most important Federal Primary
Routes in Contra Costa County and the need to widen and lower
Willow Pass Grade to alleviate the traffic congestion is
critical. Normally, the State is responsible for such work, but
due to the enormous amount of work in Caltrans District 4, the
State is willing to have the environmental and preliminary
engineering work performed under the County' s direction.
5. Both Senators, especially Senator Wilson (R) , given the Reagan
Administration position on the bill, should be commended for
their efforts in over-riding the presidential veto of the
critically needed federal funding for highways and transit.
6. There is a lack of funding for needed transportation facilities.
SB 671 would make available funding for state highway projects
as well as for local city and county projects.
The intent of AB 2285 merits the Board' s support as another
potential tool to encourage transportation system management
practices by the private sector.
CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
1. BART will be unaware of the County' s support or the County' s
desire that the BART Board of Directors more aggressively pursue
the funding available under AB 842 .
2. Lack of action in reviewing the draft interim ordinance will
delay the implementation of the interim ordinance.
3 . The work activities that the Board members requested and ongoing
commitments that the County has made, will have to be deferred
or stopped until funding is allocated for those activities.
4. The failure of the Board to act on the Route 4 Memorandum of
Understanding between the County and Caltrans will result in the
lack of action on resolving the traffic congestion on that
route. Further, the California Transportation Commission,
having just approved this action on Caltrans ' part, will take
the inaction as a signal that the project is not a high priority
to the County, which will make it difficult to obtain further
funding for this project.
5. The two Senators will be unaware of the County' s appreciation of
their actions on HR 2.
6. If SB 671 does not pass, the County may not have the option of
additional state funding to share in the cost of needed
transportation facilities.
If AB 2285 does not pass, this TSM tool will not be available to
the private sector as an incentive to provide ridesharing with
their company vehicles.
dp8:bo77TC.t07
Orig.Dept. CDD/TPD