The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 08171993 - S.1 w�- TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: Supervisor Tom Torlakson ' Costa Supervisor Tom Powers : _ County ,g Auust 17 1993 GATE: SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SEND LETTER TO ALAMEDA COUNTY BOARD-OF - -- SUPERVISORS URGING PARTICIPATION IN JOINT SUBREGIONAL LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION STUDY SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)8 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Chairman of the Board to send a letter in behalf of the Board of Supervisors to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors inviting their participation in a joint development of subregional plans for growth management and open -pace conservation in the East Contra Costa and Livermore Valley areas . Particular attention should be given to transportation corridors such as East County/Highway 84 and 1680 . BACKGROUND INFORMATION: It has been advantageous in the past for the regional corridors to be studied across county lines . These cooperative studies in the past has resulted in greatly improved planning for the future and a better strategy for developing the financial mechanisms to fund needed improvements . We have a common interest with Alameda County in many areas including improvements to Interstates 80 , 580, 680 , the .680/24 interchange and the BART system. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE (S): ACTION OF BOARD ON ADS 17 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER TYIe Board decided to also send a letter to the Tri-Valley Transportation Council regarding their .interest in the subregional land use/transportation study. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSEjFy.+ ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED AUG 17 1993 cc: District I PHIL BATCHELOR.CLERK OF THE BOARD OF District V SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADM)NISTRATOR c: Transportation Committee M382 (10158) BY ,DEPUTY s � SE_L :Tom: Torlakson ��--� ��°� 300 East Leland Road Supervisor, District Five Suite 100 Contra Costa County of _ g Pittsburg,California 94565-4961 Board of Supervisors ...; (510)427-8138 °r"1COUK� August 17 , 1993 Supervisor Ed Campbell, Chair Alameda County Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 1221 Oak Street Oakland, CA 946112/ C..Gf Dear Supervisor Cnpbell: Contra Costa County, in cooperation with Alameda County and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, has focused significant attention to the three major north-south transportation corridors that pass though the County. While these efforts have succeeded in securing funds for much needed improvements to Interstates 80, 580, 680, the '680/24 interchange and the BART system, our continued cooperation is needed to insure continued ability of our residents and continued economic development in our two counties . Most recently, through our joint participation in the Greater East Bay Rail Opportunities Coalition (GEBROC) we are beginning to develop consensus around the 'need for commuter rail in the 80 corridor. It is becoming clear that the 680 corridor has potential for a rail project over the long term. Given the time frame under which projects such as this take to be developed, it would seem appropriate for our two counties to develop joint policies related to the preservation of the 680 corridor and begin to work on a long-term strategy to implement a project in the 680 corridor. An area of significant concern to us continues to be the State Route 84 corridor (also known as the Vasco Road corridor and/or the East County Corridor) . ' Through a Joint Powers Agreement, Alameda and Contra Costa, in cooperation with the cities of Livermore, Brentwood and Antioch, jointly participated in a joint evaluation of the corridor with the goal of improving access between the job centers in Eastern Alameda County and affordable housing in eastern Contra , Costa. The study identified a feasible corridor and Supervisor Ed -Campbell August 17 , 1993 Page TWO established the need for an improved facility. The circulation element of our updated General Plan include the corridor. It appears that the draft Eastern Alameda County General Plan update also recognizes the need for this corridor. Caltrans' efforts to evaluate privatization as an option for financing highway improvements led to the proposed Mid-State Tollway project. While Contra Costa supports the concept of toll financing for construction of this facility, it is now apparent that the issues surrounding the development of the corridor as a private toll road are clouding our real goal--the development of an improved transportation corridor between eastern Alameda and Contra Costa counties . In conjunction with their review of the proposed Mid-State Tollway project, the staff of the Metropolitan Transporta- tion Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) identified the need for a comprehensive land use and transportation planning effort along the Route 84 corridor. Contra Costa supports this approach. The Congestion Management Agencies (CMAs) in both counties were asked to respond to this proposal and identify a mechanism through which this study could be completed. As a result of recent actions by the ABAG Board and the Tri-Valley Transportation Council (TVTC) , it is clear that the proposed process is breaking down. We believe that it is critically important that this effort proceed. Both of our counties have undertaken .aggressive efforts to provide affordable housing in close proximity to the large job centers being developed in the Tri-Valley area. Providing access to these jobs through the development of comprehensive transportation strategies and corridors is critically important. As with the issues that brought us together under GEBROC to evaluate the development of rail projects in our two counties, the nature of the issues surrounding the Route 84 corridor (economic development and affordable housing) suggests the need for similar leadership wi-th the East County corridor. In this regard, we believe it would- be appropriate for our two counties to provide leadership necessary to move ahead with a comprehensive land use and transportation study in the corridor. Supervisor Ed Campbell August 17, 1993 Page THREE We would propose a meeting to discuss the situation with both the Interstate 680 corridor (the need for long term planning and coordination) and the East County corridor (the need to focus on development of a transportation corridor versus a funding mechanism) . I look forward to meeting in the near future. Sincerely, Tom Torlakson Chair, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors TT:gro cc: Members, Alameda County Board of Supervisors Members, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Phil Batchelor, County Administrator, Contra Costa Val Alexeeff, Contra Costa County Adolph Martinelli, Alameda County Palmer Madden, Contra Costa Council