Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08061991 - TC.2 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE DATE: August 6, 1991 SUBJECT: Report on the Proposed Metropolitan Transportation Commission Guidelines for TDA Article 3 Funding Allocations SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: 1. ACCEPT attached report on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's proposed Bicycle Committee and Bicycle Plan Guidelines. 2. DIRECT the Public Works Director to transmit the County's comments and concerns to MTC. ll. Financial Impact: Potential impact to the County General Fund to provide staff support for the Bicycle Committee if required by MTC. III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: Each year Contra Costa County receives $300,000 to $400,000 in Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds. TDA funds are used for a wide variety of transportation and transit programs. The article 3 portion of TDA funds are designated for bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE: _ RECOMMENDATION OF C ADMINISTRATOR _ RECOMMENDATION COMMITTEE APPROVE SIGNATURE(S): /ori ACTION OF BOARD ON (� y y� APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _OTHER_ VOTE OF SUPERVISORS UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisor on the date shown. RMA:eh ATTESTED: �,y f c:B08b.t8 PHIL SATCHEL A.Clerk of the Board of twwperWwa and County A"nisMor Orig. Div: Public Works (RE) cc: See Page 2 By Deputy Report on Proposed MTC Guidelines for TDA Article 3 Funding Allocations August 6, 1991 Page 2 In November of 1990 MTC adopted its Transportation Control Measure Plan. One of the Transportation Control Measures (TCM) identified in the Plan was to improve mobility options to automobile travel by providing bicycle and pedestrian improvements. In response to the TCM's, MTC is proposing to change the allocation process for TDA Article 3 Funds. MTC feels that it is important to have bicyclists involved in the planning and development of the proposed bicycle facility improvements to be funded by TDA funds. MTC is proposing, therefore, to require cities and counties to have bicycle committees review all funding applications for TDA improvements. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: MTC will not receive any comments from Contra Costa County and will adopt their guidelines without input from Contra Costa County which may be detrimental to the County process for allocating TDA funds. cc: CAO GMEDA Community Development County Counsel Accounting City County Engineers via Pub. Works PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DATE: July 30, 1991 TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Transportation Committee SUBJECT: Comments on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Proposed Bicycle Committee and Bicycle Plan Guidelines BACKGROUND The Metropolitan Transportation Commission is proposing to change the process for allocating funds from the Transportation Development Act (TDA) Program. Attached for reference is MTC's proposal. As the TDA process currently exists for Contra Costa County, applications are distributed each year to all the cities and the County for TDA projects. All of the project applications that are submitted by the cities and the County are reviewed by the City-County Engineers Advisory Committee (CCEAC) and prioritized for funding allocation. A subcommittee of the CCEAC screens the applications, field reviews each proposed project and recommends a project list for discussion and approval by the full City-County Engineers Advisory Committee. The sub-committee includes representatives from the cities, the County, local bicycle groups, the East Bay Regional Park District and MTC. The project priority list is then forwarded on to the Mayors Conference and then ultimately to the Board for approval. Our process has worked well for Contra Costa County, and in fact, it is recognized as one of the best processes in the Bay Area for obtaining input from bicycle groups. Last year, the Regional Bicycle Advisory Committee (REBAC) did a comparison of the TDA application processes of all the counties in the Bay Area and Contra Costa County ranked No. 2. MTC's PROPOSAL MTC is proposing to require each city within the County to establish a bicycle committee that would provide input to the city as to which bicycle projects should be proposed for a TDA application. There will also be a requirement for a countywide bicycle committee which would review all the city applications and the applications from the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. The countywide committee would establish priorities for project funding. The proposed countywide committee is similar to our current CCEAC Subcommittee and would not be a change for us at that level. Board of Supervisors July 30, 1991 Page 2 COMMENTS AND CONCERNS ON MTC's PROPOSAL There are 18 cities in Contra Costa County. Each city will have to establish a bicycle committee with a minimum of three representatives from a bicycle club. It may prove to be difficult for the cities to locate enough qualified bicycle representatives for their committees. The committees will also have to be staffed which will be an additional cost to the cities. If a County committee is required similar to the city committees, a similar cost in staffing would be required of the County. Each year there is only about $300,000 to $400,000 that is available for TDA projects in Contra Costa County. It does not seem to be cost effective for each city to establish an independent committee for so little potential in funding. Perhaps the cities in Contra Costa County and the County can take this opportunity to utilize the Contra Costa Bikeway Plan Advisory Committee as a forum for city, County and bicycle group participation to propose the best projects throughout the incorporated and unincorporated County for TDA funding. The Bikeway Plan Advisory Committee was established by the Board approximately two years ago to formulate a bicycle plan for the entire County, which was ultimately to be included into the County General Plan. The activities of this committee could be expanded to include the review of projects applying for TDA funding. In fact, it could be expanded further to include review of bicycle projects utilizing other funding sources such as Measure C monies, Bike Lane Account monies, Proposition 116, and other federal grants or programs. The Bikeway Plan Advisory Committee would then become a true countywide policy making body in the area of bicycle planning and would receive input from the various bicycle groups within Contra Costa County. The Committee currently includes members from the cities of Contra Costa County, several bicycle groups, Caltrans, the East Bay Regional Park District, ABAG, and the local transit authority. One entity which currently is not represented, and which should be, is the School District. Under this concept, all proposed projects would be forwarded to the Bikeway Plan Advisory Committee and appropriate input is received from the bicycle groups and others. A project list would be generated and forwarded to the City-County Engineers Advisory Committee for prioritization of the projects as we have done in the past. The advantage of this process is that there is a checks and balances system in place. A policy/planning committee receives and reviews applications for bicycle projects with input from interested parties, and then an engineering committee prioritizes the list based on the technical merits of each project. I feel this approach will satisfy the intent of the TCM's by providing a forum for input from the various bicycle groups and yet not burden all the cities within the County to come up with a separate bicycle committee. Board of Supervisors July 30, 1991 Page 3 One other area of concern is an implication that local TDA funds may be used for regional projects. MTC is going to require all TDA projects to be part of an adopted bicycle plan pursuant to the TCM requirements. At the same time, the Bay Trail qualifies as a bicycle plan, and the TCM's include funding for large regional projects, such as providing access across the Bay Bridge, the Benicia-Martinez Bridge and Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, as a goal. These projects are region-wide projects and are very expensive. We are concerned that MTC may preempt the process in Contra Costa County for allocating its TDA funds by allocating the Contra Costa County TDA funds for these very expensive regional projects. We want to retain local control over the determination of where Contra Costa County TDA funds should be allocated. If the cities and the County decide to allocate our TDA funds for a portion of the Bay Trail, for example, then we should decide by using our allocation process through the City-County Engineers, Mayors Conference, and Board of Supervisors. SUMMARY Contra Costa County's process has worked well in the past and we have the "tools" necessary to fine tune it and make it better. I do not believe it is in anyone's interest to have a myriad of small bicycle committees throughout the County as proposed by MTC. I would recommend that MTC guidelines allow for the formation of a City-County Bicycle Committee that would allow for input from bicycle groups into the project application process for all projects in the incorporated and unincorporated County. The City-County Bicycle Committee would take the place of MTC's proposed City Bicycle Committees. Project Prioritization would be done as proposed, by a countywide bicycle committee, and would represent no charge for Contra Costa County. JMW:RMA:eh/cl c:MTCbyComm.t7 cc: CAO Val Alexeeff, GMEDA Director H. Bragdon, Community Development Director J. M. Walford, Public Works Director CCEAC 1 ♦ � T C Agency ;OSE?H R. 3 0 R T ETRCC=:ITER METROPOLITAN 01 :iGi-ITi-I :TRE=- T RANSPC)RTA rION DAKL.-�vO. CA ?,1607 O ,N ,ti I S S I O ,N MEMORANDUM -I -FAX To : RTAc Date: Fr: Doug Kimse� W.1 .: Re: Proposed TDA article 3 Allocation Guideline Revisions MTC is currently revising its. TDA Article 3 funding guidelines for bicycle and pedestrian projects. The revisions are a result or MTC's adoption of its State Transportation Comrol Measure (TCM) Plan on November 28, 1990. State TCM �9 requires that cities and counties have bicycle committees and adopted comprehensive bicycle plans to.be eligible for future TDA Articie:3 funds. The draft committee and.pian guidelines (see attached letter) have-been sent to all city and county public works directors and interested bicyclists in the region for comments. We would like'to have all comments:on the guidelinesby the end of this month. We pian to have to have the guidelines finalized by mid-August 1991 for Commission adoption in September 1991 . MTC ,,A ETRO POL I TAN TRANSPORT.: 71 ON C 0 'A .'A 1 5 5 1 0 .14 AlAtne(14 County July 1, 1991 EowAiw R- GAMPIELL DAVID S.XARF Contra r—Couniv TO:-City and County Public WorkwCommunity Services Directors Roam 1.SCHRODeR STEVE WEIR Chat, MTC is revising its Transportation Development Act (TCA) Article 3 guidelines for ,vtann Couniv allocating funds for.bicycle and pedestrian projects. KAREN Kumn ,'4aoa Countv The revisions are a result of MTC's adoption of its Transportation Control Measure FvM NeCIII (TCM) Plan on November 28, 1990. The TCM Plan is MTC*s proposal to the Bay San Area Air Quality Management District to implement California Clean Air Act, Francisco- CIAV 4Z Cownry requirements for mobil source emissions- HARRY G.BRI'TT RUZIP4 4GLJCXVAN The focus of the.TCM proposals is development and implementation of a program, San Mateo Couniv to improve mobility potions to automobile travel. Bicycle and pedestrian Tom Noun tmprovements,are one of the basic elements of the mobility plan. JANE BAKER ,ice-Chair it is imoortant to have bicyclisIsinvoived in the planning and development of bicycle facility improvements. State TCM 9 (attached), therefore, will require "n" Clara Cou"` cities and counties to have bicvcie committees and adopted comorehensive Roo 011ZI )DON IAA4o bicycle plans to be eligible for future TOA Article 3 funds- T.SE&u, o. Soiano Counm For your information and comment,-Ne have attached proposed guidelines for JAMES 'INCSWestablishing bicycle committees and developing comprehensive bicycle plans. Sorwxna Coumv We intend to finalize these guidelines by the end of juiy 1991, and will have our PtTER C.FOMAP40 Commission adopt revised TDA Article 3 funding allocation guidelines in Aisocianon or September -1.991. 3ay Area Ga-*M-e" DtANP4*WXINNA Please refer any comments to your MTC County Coordinator(see below) by ,'uiy 1. S-F.3av Conservation Ano Deveioorneni ,-QM-1154on AmGao 1.SIRACUSA Sincerely, state flusn ess. rransooffar ano r4 4ousans;Aitencv PRWON W.XELLIY William F. Hein U.5'Oewnrnern -Deputy E—Execuuve Director ot Tramoonation W(ILLLAm P.DUPUSSIF.A J'5'Decanment at Has—; County Cocroinaicrs: John McCallum-'lamed a. Sonoma-(4115) .164-1-819 ind Urban Ceveioornent Goltoom H.MCKAY Marc Roddin-Santa .164-7827 Craig Goldblarl-Contra Costa and Napa-(416) 4,64-7837 Doug Kimsey-San '7--andsco.-San Mateo. Marin (d 11 5? -64-77 9,1 uecuaveDirector -7iod McMHllan-Solano-'I zi15') LAWR*P<1 D.DAHMS oemn, WILLIAM i. HUN JOSEPH P. BORT NOIMOCINTER 101 EIGHTH STREET - OAKLAND, CA 94607-4700 415/464-7700 • FAX 415/464-7848 Final -ICN ?I an , 4ovenber _ 00 ?eOser Januar ST, CM 9 - iMPRCVE BICYCLE ACCESS DESCRiP71CN: Bicycle access improvements are currently funded by Transportation Oevelooment Ac: (-i bA) Article 3 funas totalling about S3 million per year for the Bay Area. improvements that can be funded with existing revenue are included in Phase 1 or the i CIV Plan. Bicycle improvements envisioned in this pian include measures to: - increase the number or local and rea anal bike routes, bike lanes, and/or bike paths to shopping, employment areas, cultural/educational centers, and civic centers; promote adequate curb lane widths for bicycles on roadways, permit bicycles on freeway shoulders where no alternate parallel route exists; adjust signal equipment and provide pavement marking for aetectina bikes. expandcarrying c=paniiity on buses, ferries, and raii systems for bikes. Provide means for bicycles to cross all existing Bay bridges,- encouraee. Caltrans to provide direct access for bicycles.on the Benicia-+Martinez and Richmond-San Rafael Bridges; provide direct access for bicycles on any new or modified bridee construe:ion. o Bicycle facilities for new deve!opment would. be required as part of the inairec: source review requirements (See -ST CM 16). IMPLi=TAEN7A710N: MTC will require that cities and counties have a comprehensive bicycle plan and bicycle =aviscry committee to receive TDA Article 3 funds. MTC wiil continue to encourage transit operators to provide means to carry bikes on transit. v MTC will seek funds for those measures outlined above wnicn cannot be funded with current revenue. Measures than require additional revenue are included in Phase 2 of the TCM Plan. ;mp/e.mentation of ;his measure requires Slate /egis/aricn to provide funning. The amount of funding for this measure w it de dased on the size of the -,C:✓I ;`ending program and the ei;ectiveness of the measure in improving air Qualify, _S determined dy WTC and the District. SC,iEDULS New ,UTC 70A ArTide 3 picvd-a funaina reauirements will be come etfec:ive ;n 992 o ;1,4TC C 'mii cropose new eclsla:lon o iunc it�e mctliity oacvace. '.nc.urcinc .�or-, ,or 'he av c!I 'Glee:. JWe lade :mcrm/ements ;c,r -ne 3emc;airarc-!n=_. Ric:monc. enc Fav oridces. _nd clkes cn transit. 70 - P-reiiminary Draft Bicvc!e Committee and Bicvcle Plan Guidelines Proposed Sicycle Committee SMICIEUTe C1TY CONAUT77S. Committee Membership: .A, "Cornmittee" is a minimum of 3 members each whom bicycle regularly and who, preferably, live or work in the city. More members may be added as desired. They will be appointed by the City Council. In the event sufficiently qualified bicycle committee members cannot be found,. MTC will designate one or more representatives, -either from. the Regional Bicycle Advisory Committee or from an established bicycle club or committee located in. theregion, chat, has knowledge of the -city's roadway bikeway system. Cities under- 10,000 population who have difficulty in locating a sufficient number of qualified members, may apply to -',ATC for exemption from these- requirements. The City .1vianager will designate staff to provide support and expertise to the Committee. The Committee shall be appointed by December 31, 1991,. but. need aot participate in the TDA Article 3 priority setting process for the FY 1992-93 allocation .cycle. (Committees will paTuc:pate beginning with the FY 1993-94 allocation cycle. COMMitTee Responsibilities: a) City committees will, at a minimum, be responsible for :valuating bicycle projects to be considered for annual TDA Article 3 funding.. The Committee may prioritize the list, or leave prioritization to the discretion of ,he Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee. The County's project evaluation and prioritization process will take precedence over the city's process. The list developed by the city Bicycle Advisor/ Committee shall be adopted by its Clv! Council. All city project lists will be forwarded .o the County Public Worms Department for evaluation/prioritization by the Countywide Bicycie Advisory Committe-. b) City committees shall actively participate in the development of the City's Comprehensive Bicycle Plan. COUNTYWIDE COMMI=S: Committee Membership: MTC is currently evaluating two committee membership options: Option 1 : Existing Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committees designated to review/prioritize TDA Article 3 projects may- continue in that function_ At least. 50% of the. committee's membership; however,. must be comprised of individuals representing bicycle interests: these members are to be appointed either by the- Board of Supervisors or the Congestion Management_ Agency (CMA). Option 2' A "Committee" is a minimum of f members each of whom bicycle regularly and who live or work in the county. Vlore members may be added as desired. Members will be appointed by the County Board. of Supervisors and/or CMA. The County executive/administrator will designate staff to provide support and expertise to the Committee. In the event sufficient qualified bicycle committee members can not be found, _tiiTC will designate one or more representatives, either from the Regional. Bicycle Advisory Committee or from an established bicycle club or committee located in the region, who has knowledge of the county's roadway/bikeway system. The Committee, as outlined in either option, shall be appointed by December. 31, 1991, but need not participate in the TDA Article 3 priority setting orocess for the FFY 1992-93 allocation cycle.. Committees will participate beginning with the FY 1993-94 allocation cycle. Committee Res-oonsibili ties: a) County Committees will, at a minimum, be responsible for evaluating within the unincorporated portions of the county g projects within and setting a countywide prioritization list (based on city and county project lists) for annual TDA Article 3 allocations. Either the Board of Supervisors or the Congestion !Management Agency (CNLIA) will adopt the annual countywide list and for-ward it to MTC for approval. Established county evaluation and prioritization processes may continue tobe used. The County evaluation process will take precedence over any city process. Proposed Guidelines For Comprehensive Bicvcie Plans: A comprehensive- bicycle- plan will be required of all. claimants that. submit applications for FY 1993-94. A project under- consideration for funding must be eligible for TDA_ Article 3 funding and be !D contained in. a. Comprehensive bicycle plan.. A comprehensive bicycle plan is considered. to be- one or moreof thefollowing: a- detailed bicycle circulation -element or plan included in a general , plan the. Bay Trail Plan. an adopted bikeway plan (plans approved by Caltrans under the California Bikeways Act would meet this requirement) The California Bikeways Act requires a jurisdiction applying for Bike Lane Account Funds to. have an adopted bikeways plan reviewed by transportation planning agencies and approved by Caltrans. comprehensive bicycle clan, for purposes of TDA eligibility, should,. at a rninimum, contain the foilowinc, elements as required in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act:. a, Route Selection which shall L'nclude, but not be limited to, the commuting needs of workers, shoppers and students (this information is available from general plans or the Regional IransDor-tation Plan). b ) Land use, population density and settlement patterns of _he areas adjacent to the bike routes (this information is available from general plans). c) Transportation interface, which shall include, but riot be limited to, coordination with other modes of transportation so that a bicyclist may use multiple :nodes of transportation in reaching his/her destination (this information is available from local transit agencies or MTC) d) Citizen and community development in planning (citizen and bicycle advisory committees can be consulted to satisfy this requirement) e) Flexibility and coordination with long-range transportation planning (coordination with the Regional Transportation Plan can satisfy this requirement) f) Local government involvement with. planning (coordination with local agencies and following a jurisdiction's standard adoption process would satisfy this requirement) C,) Provision of rest facilities, including, but not limited to, rest rooms, drinking water, public telephones andair for bicycle Nes (facilities could be shown on a map or their availability would be described in the pian) h.) Provision for parking facilities, including but not limited to, bicycle parking. with theft prevention devices located at. in or near civic buildings, transit terminals, business districts,. shopping centers, schools, parks and playgrounds and other locations where people congregate (facilities could also be shown on a map or described in the plan) Bicycle safety and education programs will. still be eligible for TDA Article 3 funding. These programs may be included in the bicycle plan. Comprehensive Bicycle Plans should be revised periodically.