Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08101993 - 1.42 w 1 -42 a. TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: AUGUST 10, 1993 SUBJECT: Five Hundred Thousand Dollar ISTEA Grant Application to Acquire the Claeys Property in Rodeo SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: 1. APPROVE the attached resolution which applies for a five-hundred thousand dollar ISTEA grant to acquire the Claeys property in Rodeo. 2. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to sign all necessary grant application materials. 3. ACKNOWLEDGE that acquisition partners may include the State Coastal Conservancy, Department of Fish and Game and other public partners and that the land may be acquired and owned in part by those agencies and that the County's interest may be transferred to the East Bay Regional Parks District upon acquisition. II. Financiallmpact: No County General funds. This application, if accepted, will provide funds for the joint acquisition of this property by several public agencies. III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: The Trust for Public Lands with Contra Costa County as the sponsoring agency will apply for funding under the Intermodal Transportation Enhancement Activities Program (ISTEA). Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE: _ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER' SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON August 10 , 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER See 1 . 42 b for resolution as adopted, Resolution No. 93/483 VOTE OF SUPERVISORS x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: N E : ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SE:sj c:S P D IST\BOClaeys.t8 I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Contact: Skip Epperly,313-2253 Board of Su ors on the ate shown. ATTESTED: r Orig. Div: Public Works (Admin.) PHIL 13AYCFkLOR,Clerk of the Board cc: County Counsel f Sups ry rs and Ce n Administrator Auditor-Controller CSA R-10 Committee State Coastal Conservancy By Deauty Trust for Public Lands ISTEA Grant Application to Acquire the Claeys Property in Rodeo August 10, 1993 Page Two This is a federally funded program that requires a non-federal match. The County recently purchased a 37 acre parcel with East Bay Regional Park District located along the Rodeo waterfront. Funds for this project consisted of Measure "AA" and 1988 State Park Bond funds and will constitute the non-federal match. No additional County funds will be used for this project. This application has a deadline of August 15, 1993. Final acceptance of funds for the Claeys acquisition will be subject to the verification of appraised value. The proposed acquisition is consistent with the County's General Plan and the North Contra Costa Shoreline Corridor and Rodeo Waterfront Study. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: The community may miss out on an opportunity to access funding for a potentially viable project. The site consists of approximately two (2) acres to be used as a park and staging area for the Rodeo Bay Trail Link providing intermodal connections where none currently exist. The Trust for Public Lands (TPL), State Coastal Conservancy, East Bay Regional Park District, County Service Area R-10 Rodeo (citizens advisory committee) and Contra Costa County recognize the acquisition and development of the Claeys property as a priority project. 2 -42 b THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on August 10, 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers , Smith, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RESOLUTION NO. 93/ 4 8 3 SUBJECT: The Application for Funds for the Transportation Enhancement Activities Program under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 for the Following Project: Claeys Waterfront Acquisition WHEREAS, the United States Congress has enacted the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, which is to make available over $200 million in federal dollars over a 6 year period as funds to the California Department of Transportation for transportation enhancement activities; and WHEREAS, the Department of Transportation has established the procedures and criteria for reviewing proposals and, along with the Regional Transportation Agencies, will submit to the California Transportation Commission a list of recommended projects from which the recipients will be selected; and WHEREAS, said procedures and criteria established by the California Department of Transportation call for the approval of an application by the applicants governing body before submission of said application to the California Transportation Commission; and WHEREAS, the application contains assurances that the applicant must comply with; and WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected, will enter into an agreement with the State of California to carry out the transportation enhancement activities project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: 1. Approves the filing of an application for the Transportation Enhancement Activities Program for consideration for funding. 2. Will provide $63,000 in non-federal funds for this project. 3. Certifies that this body will make adequate provisions for operation and maintenance of the project. 4. Appoints J. Michael Walford, Public Works Director, as agent of the Public Works Department to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents, including but not limited to application, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on,which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project. Originator: Public Works (Admin.) cc: County Administrator's Office Count Counsel I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Y an action taken and entered on the minutes of the CSA R-10 Board of Sup4BA* ra on th date shown. CL ATTESTED: 3 Trust for Public Lands PHILC LOR.Clerk of the Board State Coastal Conservancy of Sups I rs and CounT Administrator Contact: Skip Epperly, 313-2253 By D .Deputy SE:sj c:SPDIST�ResTrans.tS RESOLUTION NO. 93/_±8 8 3 i ASSURANCES Carnmitment/Prior Commitment: Has the implementing agency or project sponsor certified that it is willing and able to maintain and operate the project? Yes No Please describe the best evidence of the certification available. If none is available,when can one be provided? Project sponsor possesses legal authority to nominate transportation enhancement activity and to finance,acquire,.and construct the proposed project;and by formal action(e.g.,a.resolution).the sponsoring agency's governing body authorizes the nomination of the transportation ' enhancement activity,including all,understanding.and assurances contained therein,and authorizes the person identified as the official representative of the sponsor to actin connection..wkh the nomination and to provide such additional information as may be required. Project sponsor will maintain and operate tfie property acquired,developed, rehabilitated,or restored with the funds for the lifa of the resultant facility(ies)or activity. Wllh the approval of the,California Department of Transportation,the applicant or its successors in interest in the property may transfer the responsibility to maintain and operate the property. t Project sponsor will give the California Department of Transportation's representative access to And the right to examine all records,books, papers,or documents related to the transportation enhancement activity. Project sponsor will cause work on the project to be commenced within a reasonable time after receipt of notification from the State that funds have been approved by the Federal Highway Administration and that the project will be carried to completion with reasonable diligence. Project sponsor will comply where applicable with provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,the National Environmental Policy Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act,the Secretary of the Interiors Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation,Secretary of the Interior's Standardsfor Treatment of Historic Properties,the State Historical Building Code and any other federal,state,and/or local laws, rules and/or regulations. I certify that the information contained in this transportation enhancement activity nomination,including required attachments,is accurate and that I have read and understand the important information and agree to the assurances on this form. Signed . Date (TEA Sponsors Authorized Representative as shown in Resolution) Printed(Name and Title) Application Form Page 5 February 23, 1993 Include this page in each application. 07/3,0/93 17:00 %2415 495 0541 T.P.L. WEST REG, Q 002/012 Sample Sponsorship Letter Mr. Larry Dahms Executive Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission Joseph P. Bart MetraCenter 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607 RE% Rodeo Bay Trail Link Dear Mr. Dahns: On behalf of the Contra Costa County Department of Public Works, I am writing to confirm our commitment to sponsor the application for funding through Caltrans' Transportation Enhancement Activities Program (TEA) for the acquisition of lands located along San Pablo Avenue in Rodeo for development of a Bay Trail link, Bay Trail staging area, and shoreline park. In coordination with the East Bay Regional Park District, State Coastal Conservancy, and Rodeo R-10, we are requesting that $500,000 be allocated from TEA for the acquisition and development of the Claeys property to provide much-needed bicycle and pedestrian trail access for residents of Rodeo and Contra Costa County. If funded, the Rodeo Bay Trail Link project will allow Rodeo residents access to job centers at the Unocal and Wickland Oil facilities, Crockett, and to the Bay. The availability of the 37-acre Claeys property presents us with a unique opportunity to enhance the outstanding resources located along the Bay, and provide intermodal connections where they currently do not exist. The development of the Claeys property for this purpose is recognized as a priority project by the State Coastal Conservancy, East Bay Regional Parks District, Contra Costa County, and the Rodeo R-10 (a citizen's advisory group to the County) in the North Contra Costa County Shoreline Corridor and Rodeo, Waterfront Peasibility Study. It is my understanding that ISTEA requires that funds be used for projects that enhance the quality of life around transportation facilities with a consideration for the overall environmental context of the community. The project must also be above normal mitigation or transportation projects. The Rodeo Bay Trail Link project will advance the intent of the enhancements program by providing a critical link in the Bay Trail corridor and new connections to job centers and the Bay for Rodeo residents. For these reasons, the Contra Costa County Department of Public Works is prepared to sponsor and enthusiastically supports the funding of the Rodeo Bay Trail Link project through TEA. sincerely, • 07/30/93 17.01 %2415 495„0541 T.P.L. WEST REG, Q003/012 INSTRUCTIONS TO PROJECT APPLICANTS TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES APPLICATIONS Project applications are due by August 10 i.9y93 for 1994 STIP projects to be programmed in fiscal years 199495, 1995.96, and.1996-97. (Due date may be later in some areas. Contact your RTPA for information.) TURN IN APPLICATIONS TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AGENCY(RTPA) HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY. The M11 exception to taking your application to the RTPA is if your proposed projoci has no geographic'home',then the application would be turned into: Transportation Enhancement Activities Applications Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office 1120 N Street, Room 4400 Sacramento, California 94814 To be assured of reimbursement,all federal and state requirements must be met before any costs are incurred against the Transportation Enhancement Activity (TEA). An agreement must be signed and approved before expenditures can be reimbursed. Consult the Guidelines for the ISTEA*Transportation Enhancement Activities program when filling out the application. A complete application for federal enhancement funds consists of a copies each of the following hems for the proposed activities. Applications must be submitted on 8-112 by 11 inch paper,and all pages must be consecutively numbered (foldouts are acceptable.) 1. 4pilcation form 2. Cost estimate(Formal attached.) 3. Implementation schedule-preliminary engineering,right of way,construction 4. Letter of commitment to sponsorship,signed by official of applicant agency. (it project is selected by the RTPA,a resolution from governing body describing the agency's authority to carry out the proposed transportation enhancement activities,including commitment of match,indication of amount, and source of matching funds will be required,) S. Letter from administering agency, agreeing to implement project for applicant agency(if applicable). Lotter must state whether h has a master agreement or other agreement to do title 23 federal-aid projects. It administering agency is a state or federal agency,letter must include reference to statutory authority to charge on a reimbursable basis. 6. Site plan (development project) 7. Activity location map B. Photographs of site(s)and resources 9. Evidence of land tenure,such as title report or lease agreement(development project) 10. Right of Way phase description(Checklist attached) 11. Evidence of official listing on federal,state,or local historical registration progr2M,or locally-adopfed written criteria 12. Acquisition map showing exterior boundaries and parcqI numbers(acquisition project) 13, NEPA ICECA documentation,If applicable. (Preparing environmental documentation can be an eligible cost of the project,) 14. Permits(if applicable). (Obtaining permits can be an eligible cost of the project.) ISTSA; intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1091. A00.mi,om Form June 15, 1993 Include this page in each application 07/10/93 17:01 '0415 495 0541 T.P.L. WEST REG. r IM 004/012 Transportation PnIhoncernont Activftios,(TEA) Application Form Gr=NERAI- INFORMATION 1993 .Year Proposed X Proposal in entirely within the RTPA. —Proposal has sitas in more than one DTPA. Proposal is statewido or Muhl-regional in scope,& has no geographic'home'. TEA PROJECT NAME: Rodeo Bay Trail Link: Interstate 80 C : PROJECT APPLICANT(Public Agency-Address-ZIP-Phone) Insen Figures in current year dollars. Contra Costa County TEA FUNDS REQUESTED $500.000 255 Glacier Drive NON-FEDERAL TEA MATCH $125,0 0 Martinez, CA 04553 ADMINISTERING AGENCY (Address-Phona) TOTAL TEA PROJECT COST $62510 0 TEA is a stand-alone Project. D TEA is part of a larger Erciiect. $- Total Project Cost Proposed transportation enhancement activity will be scared in one of the following divisions. Fill out and include the page indicated: 1. Bicycle, Pedestrian.Abandoned Rail Right of Way ❑ 3. Transportation Aesthetics and Scenic Values(Page 4c.) (Page 4o.) ❑ 2. Historic/Archaeological(Page 4b.) 4. Water Pollution-Due to Highway Runoff.(Page 4d.) Transportation Enhancement Activity Project Person with day-to-day responsibility for project(K different Representative from project representative)(Name,tide,phone) (Name,title.phone) Skip Epperly Skip Epperly Contra Costa County BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES(not to exceed 60 words) Describe the project's locatlon,size.etc.(not the justification or benefits), FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE FOR TEA PROJECT(check proposed typo and status.) Type. _Environmental Assessment _2L__Cat&qorioW Exdusion Environmental Impact Statement Status: Not Started _Complete In Progress 'Anticipated Completion Date: Name of Lead Agency for environmental document Contra Costa County Contra Costa County will conduct CEQA review once park & trail develop— ment plans are adopted. AXdIrAlft F rn Page I June 15. 1993 Include this page in each application. 07/90/99 17:02 $415 495 0541 T.P.L. WEST REG. 0005/012 INFORMATION REOIJIRED TO ADDRESS SCREENINf; f;RITERIA If any of the applicable screening criteria below are not met,the proposal will not be ranked or evaluated any further. A`no' answar to any of the following gWest ons jmmedimeiy disqualifies.the pro os I; t. Does the project tit tho TEA program? ® Yes ❑ No a. DIRECT RELATIONSHIP TO INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ® Function ❑ Proximity ❑Impact Briefly explain direct relationship to transportation system. (How does the proposed activity enhance the transportation system?) 5-re— OAA-�t,Al b. OVER AND ABCVE A NORMAL PROJECT ® Yes ❑ No (It the activity is mentioned in an environmontal document as a required mitigation,or if the activity Is required by permitting agencies to proceed with another project,this activity is not over and above a"normal'project.) c. WHICH CATEGORY OR CATEGORIES ENCOMPASS THE TEA? (May be more than one,) .&—l. Provision of facilities for pedestrians and 6. Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation bicycles, buildings, structures or facilities(including historic railroad facilities and canals). 2. Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or 7 preservation of abandoned railway corridors (including historic sites. y the conversion and use thereof for pedestrian or 3. Scenic or historic highway programs. bicycle traits). . 34. Landscaping and other scenic beautification. 8 Control and removal of outdoor advertising. 9. Archaeological planning and research. 5. Historic preservation, 10 Mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff. 2. Is the project consistent(or'not inconsistent")with federal,state,regional or local land use and regional transportation' plans,goals and policies? El Yes ❑ No ^� Please describe the plans used in eeve uating consistency: 1 * � J-Cr. lj►�C�`C^--Tr�t' "or 3. 3, is the project financially viable? © Yes L.I No (The governing body will be required to submh a resolution to this effect I the project is selected by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency.) 4. Is this project well-defined,well-justified, and ready-to-go in the year proposed? Yes ❑ No Please describe any evidence supporting this statement, 6ep, oc�CwCXNCA 5. Does the project improve air quality or does it have a neutral air quality impact'? Yes ❑ No r Please describe any evidence supporting this conclusion. ems,. clv.re- W�t� [,.,r otuo.,. t;J 6. Is the project as proposed in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act? ❑ Yes ❑ No What evidonce is there to support this claim? (Please Describe) Not Applicable 7. For archaeology and historic preservation projects,is the proposal in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological and Historic Preservation? ❑ Yes ❑ No Please describe any evidence available to support this claim. ® Not Applicable .tpp"wn Form Page June 15. 1993 Include this page in each application 07/10/93 17:02 $415 495 0541 T.P.L. REST REG. 0008/012 INFORMATION REQUIRED TO ADDRESS SCORING CRITERIA 1. Regional and Communfly Enhttnoment(Maximum 50 points) Please explain Ing activity's primary allocis - its intent and purpose -on the following elements: a. How does ilia project improve overall quality-ol-life,community,and/or environment ? (Maximum 10 points) b. Describe how the activity increases access to activity centers, such as businesses,schools,recreational areas and shopping areas. Does the proposed project connect transportation modes.or does the activity have other mufti-rt'adai aspects? Does the project reinforce or complement the regional transportation system,or fill a deficiency in the system? (Maximum a points) C. Describe how activity implements goals in the regional transportation plan,or other adopted Inderal, state,or local plans. (Max. 8 points) L d. Please explain the degree to which the project increases availability or awareness of historic,community,visual or natural resources. (Maximum 8 points) e. Please describe evidence of degree of regional or community support and summarize that support below. (Maximum 8 points) f. If the project encompasses more than one of the activity-specdic divisions, explain. (projects can score in only one of the activity-specific divisions below) (Maximum 8 points) Ste— —T, C—JhG.'k 2. Dost EHectiveness/Reesoneble Cost(Maximum t0 paints) What is the anticipated life of the f acility or product resulting from this project in years? years, What is the total capita!cost of the project? s oak_, l 0- Please indicate how reasonable or cost ehective the project is on the following scale: I Highly Cost Effective/Very Reasonable Costs ❑ Reasonable Costs/Moderately Cost Effective ❑ Less than Reasonable Costs/Low Cost Effectiveness ❑ Not Cost Effective/Costs Are Not Reasonable Show any Information,calculations,examples or comparisons that explain your selection above. Attach additional information 3. Protect Need (Maximum 5 points) Are the enhancements proposed threatened,or will an opportunity be lost it the project is not funded? ❑ Yes ❑ No Please explain the specific threats or opportunities lost. See- 4. Act'vitU-SpecRic Enhancement divlaions (Maximum 40 points) Project can score in only ga@of the following activity- specific divisions. In which category should this proposal be evaluated? Select only 2112: ❑ 1. Bicycle, Pedestrian,Abandoned Rail Right of Way Q 3. Transportation Aesthetics and Scenic Values ❑ 2. HistoridArchaaological Cl 4, Water Pollution Due to Highway Runoff. Please answer clucstions torthe selected division. Only include that Division page in the application. Aaprwl�on Fam age June 15. 1993 Include this page in each application, 07/$0/99 17:03 $415 495 0541 T.P.L. RBST REG. 9007/012 Division 1 1. Bicycle, Pedestrian or Abandoned Rail Right-of-Way Proposals: a. What is the need for the proposed activity? Please specify high,medium,or low and explain your answer, For example, is there a shonage of pedestrian or bicycle facilities available? Is there a missing link in connecting the intermodal system: how important is it? How necessary are new facilities serving the system? (Maximum 20 points) SGC a•�c,.c�r.t� b. How well does the proposal meet or address the opportunities and/or needs for bicycle or pedestrian facilities? (Maximum 20 points) S 4e, pv •paiCu+a,Pal M Page 4; Juno 15, 1993 Include only one Page 4 In each appllosttion 07/.70/93 17:03 $415 495 0541 T.P.L. REST REG. 2008/012 ASSURANCES ,mmilmentYPrior Commitment: ,s the project applicant or administering agency certified that it is willing and able to maintain and opdrats the project? 0 Yes ❑ No :ase describe the best evidence of the certification available, 11 none is available,whon can one be provided? •oject applicant possesses legal authority to nominate transportation enhancement activity and to finance,acquire,and construct the proposed ojeci; and by formal action(e,g„a resolution)the applicant agency's governing body authorizes the nomination of the transportation lhancement activity,including all understanding and assurances contained therein, and authorizes the person identified as the ofl4al presentative of the applicant to act in connection with the nomination and to provide such additional information as may be required. .eject applicant will maintain and operate the property acquired,developed,rehabilitated,or restored for the lila of the resultant laeility(ies)or :tivhy. With the approval of the California Department of Transportation,the applicant or its successors in interest in the property may transfer a responsibility to maintain and operate the property. roject applicant will give the California Department of Transportation's representative access to and the right to examine all records,books, >apers,or documents related to the transportation enhancement activity. roject applicant will cause work on the project to be commenced within a reasonable time atter receipt of notification from the State that funds eve been approved by the f=ederal Highway Administration and that the project will be carried to completion with reasonable diligence. roject applicant will comply where applicable with provisions of the California Environmental Cual'y Act,the National Environmental Policy Act. re Americans with Disanilhias Act,the Secretary of the Interiors Standardi and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation,and any cher federal.state, and/or local laws, rules and/or regulations. certify that the information contained in this transportation enhancemont activity application,including required attachments,is accurate and fat I have read and understand the important information and agree to the assurances on this form. Signed Data (TEA Applicant's Authorized Representative as shown in Resolution) )rinted(Name and Titlo) A20"-n Pam Paco 5 ,Juno 15. 1993 Include this page in each application. 07/00/99 17:09 $415 495 0541 T.P.L. REST REG. ID 009/012 COST ESTIMATE FORMAT Preliminary Engineering $ Right of Way(Acquisition/Utility Relocation) -includes capital and support costs $ Construction Contract Items $ Agency-Fumished Materials $ Subtotal $ Contingencies $ Construction Contract Total $ Construction Engineering $ Total Construction $ LTEM-ESTIMATE Item Descrig ion Unit _ Quantity Unit price _ A=Wat (Limit construction item estimate to t sheet, Enter total as"Construction Contract Items",above.) SUMMARY A + B C D Federal Match TEA Total PHASES: Funds Funds' Cost Cost" Preliminary Engineering Right of Way Construction Total Cost Source(s)of Match: Enter costs in 'D'column only when proposed TEA is part of a larger project, rather than a stand-alone TEA project. CASH FLOW CHART Fiscal Yr 94195 F.Y. 95/96 F.Y.96/97 Beyond 96197 Preliminary Engineering Right of Way Construction Total Cost COST ESTIMATE CHECKLIST To discuss cost implications of Title 23 Federal-aid requirements: Contact Caltrans District. It Right of Way phase is involved: Contact Caltrans District. If another agency will be administering the project: Include hs charges for administering. If proposed TEA is directly related to the State Highway:Obtain signature: District—recommends that match be provided from the State Highway Account, District Director: Date If proposed TEA is landscaping on the State Highway right of way: Obtain signatures: District_.._recommends that maintenance be provided by Caltrans 4 years after planting. District Landscape Architect: Date District Maintenance: Date Headquarters Maintenance: Date Application Format June 15, 1993 07/130/93 17:04 $415 495 0541 T.P.L. WEST REG. Q010/012 Project Description: TEA funds will provide funding for the acquisition of lands located on San Pablo Bay and adjacent to San Pablo Avenue, and for the development of a Bay Trail link, trail staging area, and shoreline park in Rodeo. This project is a major component of the North Contra Costa Shoreline Corridor and Rodeo Waterfront Feasibility Study. The 37-acre Claeys property is bounded on the east side by the Rodeo Sanitary District and the southern boundary is San Pablo Avenue. Approximately 33 acres are submerged tidelands leaving 2.6 acres on San Pablo Bay to be developed as a park and another 1.37 acres between the Southern Pacific tracks and San Pablo Avenue to be developed as a staging area to provide access to the Bay and Bay Trail. screening criteria Ia. Direct Relationship: Acquisition of bayfront lands and development of the Rodeo Bay Trail Link will provide pedestrian and bicycle access from Rodeo to job centers at the Unocal and Wickland oil Facilities and the San Francisco Bay. This project is consistent with the Rodeo Waterfront Feasibility Study; the Specific Plan for the area is now in progress. 4. Evidence of well-defined/justified project: The 37-acre shoreline parcel is currently owned by The Trust for Public Land. The East Bay Regional Park District has committed funds to acquire 35 acres located north of the railroad tracks on the bayside for the park component of the project. The Coastal conservancy is now in the process of completing a draft of the development plans for the staging area and the entire 37-acre project area. The $500, 000 requested will complete the project. Scoring Criteria Ia. Quality-of-life issues: Acquisition and development of the Claeys property will provide access to a critical link in the Bay Trail and reclaim and enhance the shoreline of the San Pablo Bay for public enjoyment. It will provide an alternative mode of transportation to job centers in the area, as well as an inviting atmosphere for residents to enjoy the bayfront on what is now a vacant lot. lb. Connection to activity centers: Acquisition and development of this link in the Bay Trail will connect the communities of Rodeo and Crockett and Rodeo to neighboring job centers. The proposed shoreline park will serve as an additional activity center for the community and will be accessed by the trail. lc. Objectives of project as it appears in federal, state, local plans: The North Contra Costa County shoreline Feasibility Study (see attached map) designates the property as a park and trail staging area. The proposed route of the Bay Trail runs through the property along San Pablo Avenue. The project will also advance the goals set forth in three sections of the June 1993 Draft California Transportation Plan: the Roadway, Bicycle, and 07/,30/93 17:04 $415 495 0541 T.P.L. WEST REG. 0011/012 Pedestrian Travel Enhancement, Air, and Environmental Quality sections (see attached pages) . Id. Degree to which project increases awareness and availability of resources: Acquisition and development as a park and staging area for this section of the Bay Trail will increase the availability and awareness of community, visual, and natural resources to the highest degree. If not acquired, the property will most likely be developed as a storage facility or for other commercial purposes, inhibiting access to and views of the bay and use of the trail. le. Degree of regional or community support: The North Contra Costa Shoreline Corridor and Rodeo Waterfront Feasibility Study is the product of the joint efforts of the State Coastal Conservancy, EBRPD, Contra Costa County, the Bay Trail, and the Rodeo R-10, a citizen's advisory group to the County. Together, these agencies have committed funds for planning, acquisition, restoration, and trail development on the Bay's waterfront. Completion of the Rodeo Bay Trail Link project will significantly advance the objectives of this joint effort and the goals set forth in the study. If. More than one activity-specific divisions: In addition to providing a critical link in the Bay Trail, creation of the Shoreline Park will enhance the landscape along the Bay and view from San Pablo Avenue. Project Need 3. Unique Opportunity: The acquisition of the Claeys property represents a unique opportunity to link up critical sections of the Bay Trail and reclaim access to and enjoyment of the San Francisco Bay for Rodeo and other Contra Costa County residents. Currently, access to bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as the Bay, does not exist or is extremely limited in this area. Division 1 la. What is the need for the proposed activity? The need for a bicycle/pedestrian trail link and staging area for the Bay Trail, and accompanying shoreline Park, is extremely high in Rodeo where such facilities currently do no exist. By linking Rodeo up with the Bay Trail, it will significantly enhance residents' access to and from the area, neighboring job centers at Unocal and Wickland Oil Companies in Crockett, and the Bay. lb. How well does the proposal meet the opportunities and/or needs for bicycle or pedestrian facilities? Few undeveloped and strategically located bayfront parcels remain available for acquisition, resulting in extremely limited opportunities to extend the Bay Trail corridor. Local trail maps 1 07,"30/93 17:05 V415 495 0541 T.P.L. NEST REG. 2012/012 (see attached) strongly indicate that the extension of the trail through the Claeys property is the logical trail alignment.