HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09231997 - D3 5'T0: I BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE - - - Contra
Costa
DATE: September 22, 1997 n^u�
IJV
SUBJECT: 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommend that the Contra Costa Transportation Authority adopt Funding Scenario #6A (see
Exhibit A) as the basis for submitting final project proposals to the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission for inclusion in the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program.
FISCAL IMPACT
No impact to the General Fund. Potential for capturing significant amounts of new funds for
transportation improvement projects in Contra Costa.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
As the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Contra Costa, the Contra Costa Transportation
Authority (Authority), must submit a proposal to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
for inclusion in the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The Board of
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
_ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE
J
—OTHER ,
SIGNATURE (S): Donna Gerbe a ciami a
ACTION OF BOARD ON Septembe , 1997 APPROVED E MMENDED x OTHER x
Following Board discussion of the matter, IT IS BY BO D ORDERED that the above
recommendation is APPROVED: and Community Develop _ t Department staff is DIRECTED
to plan a workshop to address the issues raised today with the Contra. Costa Transportation
Authority.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: 2,3,5,4 NOES: 1 ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: - ABSTAIN: - MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact Person, Steven Goetz, 335-1240 ATTESTED September 23, 1997
Orig: Community Development PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
CC: Public Works, T.E. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Regional Committees (via CDD) AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Smith & Kempton (via CDD)
Commissioners, CCTA (via CDD)
BY a , DEPUTY
198 State Transportation Improvement Program
September 22, 1997
Page Two
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
Supervisors has been monitoring this process since receiving correspondence from the Contra Costa
Council in December 1996, which anticipated that the 1998 STIP could be the largest in history and
Contra Costa's share could be in excess of$80 to $90 million.
On January 14, the Board of Supervisors referred this issue to the Transportation Committee. On
February 11, 1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted the following actions:
- reaffirmed the commitment to fund improvements to the State Route 4 (SR 4) Corridor;
- requested the Authority to explore the use of bridge toll revenue to fund the 1-680 High Occupancy
Vehicle (HOV) lane project; and
- urged the Authority to work with MTC to develop evaluation criteria that included project
readiness, safety, regional congestion relief, and cost effectiveness as factors for allocating STIP
funds.
The Board further requested the Transportation Committee to report to the Board on discussions at the
Regional Committees and the Authority regarding the 1998 STIP. This Transportation Committee report
updates the Board on these discussions.
On September 17, 1997, the Authority adopted a draft set of proposals identified as Funding Scenario
#6. These proposals were transmitted to MTC as Contra Costa's initial draft submission. The Authority
also considered, but did not adopt, an alternative funding proposal (Scenario #6A) recommended by
Commissioners Gerber and Canciamilla. The Authority directed that it also be circulated to the Regional
Committees for comment along with Funding Scenario #6. The Authority further directed staff to
research the funding concepts proposed in Funding Scenario #6A and report to the Authority regarding
their viability. At its October 15 meeting, the Authority will consider this additional information, along with
the comments of the Regional Committees, before it submits final project priorities to MTC.
The Transportation Committee recommends that the Board support Funding Scenario #6A as the basis
for submitting final project proposals to MTC for inclusion in the 1998 STIP. An important component of
Funding Scenario #6A are the proposed "Principles for the 1998 STIP Project List". The justification for
this recommendation is provided in the following discussion of the proposed Principles. Please note
that minor edits were made to Funding Scenario #6A to clarify issues that were raised at the CCTA
meeting.
1. Address all high priority transportation needs consistent with the STIP Bid Target of$100 million
existing legislation, and Measure C revenue estimates. Alternative STIP project lists have been
prepared for $70, $80, and $90 million bid targets as a way to address potential changes in the
1998 STIP if Senate Bill (SB) 45 (which revises the STIP process) is signed into law. However, if
SB 45 is signed by the Governor, we will have an opportunity to reconsider our STIP proposal.
Contra Costa's transportation needs would not be well served by submitting a STIP proposal for
any less than what current law allows. Furthermore, if the STIP proposal is coordinated with
programming of new Measure C revenues, it can maximize the potential return of funds to Contra
Costa.
The following comparison between Funding Scenarios emphasizes that Funding Scenario #6A is
just as viable a STIP proposal as Funding Scenario #6. The regional fees used to leverage STIP
funds are based on a financial plan prepared by the East County Regional Fee Authority.
Funding Scenario #6 Funding Scenario #6A
Projects STIP Fully Funded STIP Fully Funded
SR4 West Gap Project 30.0 Yes 30.0 Yes
SR4 (Bailey- Railroad) 16.0 Yes 16.0 Yes
SR4/Railroad Ave I/C 33.9 Yes 22.0 Yes
BART-ATTC Project 10.0 10% of STIP 10.0 10% of STIP
SR4 Bypass 7.5 Yes 19.0 Yes
SR24 Aux. Lane 3.4 Yes 3.4 Yes
TOTAL 100.8 100.4
1998 State Transportation Improvement Program
September 22, 1997
Page Three
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
2. Maintain the CCTA practice of phasing implementation of large projects to match transportation
needs with available revenues. The SR 4 West Gap Closure and the SR 4 East freeway projects,
are examples where the Authority has phased the implementation of large projects to balance
significant transportation needs with the timing of available revenues. The Authority has been
careful to create phases that can provide a significant increment of traffic improvement without a
significant increase to ultimate project cost. As proposed, the 1-680 HOV Lane project would
extend nearly 12 miles to relieve future congestion projected to occur sometime after completion
of the 680/24 project and the second span of the Benicia Bridge. There exists an opportunity to
determine if certain components of this project, such as the SR 4 ramp improvements or the HOV
lanes north of SR 4, can be more closely timed with future traffic volumes and funding availability
(particularly Regional Measure 1 funds).
3. Reaffirm CCTA Resolution 95-43-P which directs the Authority to seek Regional Measure 1 (RM1)
funds for the 1-680 HOV Lane project. Resolution 95-43-P was the policy statement the Authority
adopted as part of its 1995 Strategic Plan. That resolution identified improvements to SR 4 West
and East, and HOV lanes on 1-680 as its primary focus in seeking additional RM1, state, and
federal funds. Only the 1-680 HOV lanes have the potential to use RM1 funds. A portion of the
project is designated by current law as part of the bridge. The Benicia Bridge EIS identified the 1-
680 HOV lanes, as well as improvements to 1-680 in Solano County, as necessary to serve future
traffic accommodated by the second span. The 1-680 HOV lanes benefit both Contra Costa and
Solano counties and are more appropriately funded through a regional funding source such as
RM1 funds, rather than STIP or Measure C funds available specifically to Contra Costa.
A state law was recently enacted transferring authority over Bay Area tolls to MTC. The law
requires MTC to develop a financial plan for completing the RM1 projects and submit it to the
Legislature by December 31, 1998. That financial plan will assure completion of the current RM1
project list, and will identify a revenue stream could be used for additional projects since the RM1
toll increase will continue in perpetuity. There is an opportunity now to initiate discussions with
Solano County on unfunded bridge-related improvements in both counties that can be proposed
to MTC and the Legislature after funding of the remaining RM1 projects (Carquinez Bridge
replacement and the second Benicia Bridge) is assured.
4. Reaffirm CCTA Resolution 95-43-P which finds that "newly available Commuterway funds could
be programmed in future Strategic Plans for projects on Route 4 in eastern Contra Costa to
encourage the use of Route 4 rather than local arterials." In 1995, with the potential that the SR
242 widening project would not be designated for HOVs and the suitability of the HOV lanes on 1-
680 for RM1 funds, the CCTA identified projects on SR 4 East as eligible for future Measure C
Commuterway funds. At that time the Authority allocated Measure C funds for project
development activities on the 1-680 HOV Lane and the SR 4 East (Railroad to SR 160) projects.
Under the most optimistic circumstances for securing RM1 funds for 1-680 HOV lanes, up to $22
million in new Measure C funds could be available for SR 4 East under Funding Scenario#6A
when compared to Funding Scenario #6. The combination of Measure C funds, used to address
the existing severe congestion on SR 4 East, and East County fees, used to provide added
capacity for new development as required by Measure C, could extend the SR 4 widening to east
of Loveridge Road. Reaffirming the vision in Resolution 95-43-P could maximize the benefits of
the Measure C Expenditure Plan beyond what most thought possible when it passed in 1988.
attachments (1)
Exhibit A: Funding Scenario#6A
j :\sgoet\stip.bo
EXfUM A
PRINCIPLES FOR 1998 STIP PROJECT LIST
1. Address all high priority transportation needs consistent with current STIP Bid
Target of$100 million, existing legislation, and Measure C revenue estimates.
2. Maintain CCTA practice of phasing implementation of. large projects to match
transportation needs with available revenues.
R e--a r M
3. CCTA Resolution 95-43-P which directs CCTA to seek Regional
Measure 1 funds for the 1-680 HOV Lane project.
4. Reaffirm CCTA Resolution 95-43-P which finds that"newly available Commuterway
funds could be programmed in future Strategic Plans for projects on Route 4 in
eastern Contra Costa to encourage the use of Route 4 rather than local arterials."
EXHIBIT A (continued)
Z o
�o O
oll
5 (}' O
cd
cz
zzA o
,.
O u cn
C ,,, n res U
w � z. b
xw
ri
.�.
Z cin
PC
C,
o M spy1-4
i ai pyr
�v� ra.
W Iii
40.Ee b£ r
H 0 I44�.,
.. ' t O
V1 u 3£
03 co
u
y u a b
_ � •-� an E •o o •o q, a �c �' �
U ca u of 4J
1-5
1=4
a1Z
v� Ga. ai � GQ Q ai ti H C qs C'scn
, a
r s ash y ° 4 ci #3
cu
(1 "' z
Z •foo b b b � •foo b
0
N h cn
N °
N •H
v a 6
� F �
a w
`^ 5 fV l- C� tr.
PC
ios-
d y4 •-�
O o
zA
U � o
V � .-. •-1 N � M �o a� �
W V O d9 O 00
.�
N .d N
z � Au � °
O �G 00
M
PC cli Q w
42 E-
O
C� e� a ,3 U
3 u
�I o
° •d O
e > a c '
o d CA w y
d U C c+i cd
a cn ai ;° odd ¢ W 3
o U
En
s�aafo�d a��PiP �CH.LS S g
��.. 0
v v�
Request to:' , Speak For
( THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place h in the box near the speakers' rostnim
before addressing the Board.
Name: o d AizM2��e'J
• L '2�/TJ
I am speaking for myself_ at organiration:_W,4W-SV-19!7 o S �'��x�rrnr�E
(pains of organisation)
CHE NE:
1 wish to speak on Agenda Item
My coininents will be: general _for_"ainst"_.
1 wish to speak on the subject of
_ 1 do not wish to speak but leave dme comments for the Board
to consider:
SPEAKERS
1 . Deposit the "Request to Speak" form (on the reverse
side) in the box next to the speaker' s microphone
before your agenda item is to be considered.
2 . You will be called on to make your presentation.
Please speak into the microphone at the podium.
3 . Begin by stating your name and address and whether
you are speaking for yourself or as the
representative of an organization.
4 . Give the- Clerk a copy of your presentation or
support documentation if available before speaking.
S . ,Limit your presentation to three minutes . Avoid
repeating comments made by previous speakers . (The
Chair may limit length of presentations so all
persons may be heard) .
Request to Speak Form
( THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum
before addressing the Board.
Name:
z City: S /�
1 am speaking for myself_or organization: oxvi7�W
*MM of o�;an�zaition)
CHECK ONE:
I wish to speak on penia Item #.2-3 Date: q a3
My c-.IUUI s will be: general _fbr_againA .
1 wish to speak on the subject of -
1 do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board
to c/nlonsider. S�� S'T
�� ��✓ � /�
C� U iU Ci L ( cs"C��.S �2 Gri�+yr�J GJ d�lc r�/�r GV r-7-
.
SPEAKERS
1 . Deposit the "Request to Speak" form (on the reverse
side) in the box next to the speaker' s microphone
before your agenda item is to be considered.
2 . You will be called on to make your presentation.
Please speak into the microphone at the podium.
3 . Begin by stating your name and address and whether
you are speaking for yourself or as the
representative of an organization.
4 . Give the Clerk a copy of your presentation or
support documentation if available before speaking.
5 . ,Limit your presentation to three minutes . Avoid
repeating comments made by previous speakers . (The
Chair may limit length of presentations so all
persons may be heard) .
-: � (,'aft �•3
` CONTRA COSTA
C O U N C I L
2694 Bishop Drive, Suite 121
San Ramon, CA 9.1583
Phone: (.5 10) 866-6666
Fax: (51.0) 866-8647
President - September 1.7, 1997
Tom McCracken
General Manager
Sunvallev Shopoing Center
Immediate Past President
Linda Best
Partner John E. Marquez, Chair
Hasseltine Best Contra Costa Transportation Authority
Vice President 1340 Treat Blvd., Suite 150
Task Forces
William R.Gray Walnut Creek, CA 94596
President
William P.Gray and Comcany
Dear Chairman Marquez:
Vice President
Task Forces
Tomi Van de Brooke This is a follow up to our letter of December 20, 1996 regarding priorities for the
Managing Director,Contra C to
The PSN Comcanv 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). We appreciate the
Vice President opportunity to participate in efforts to develop local consensus on a priority list of
Finance&Administration projects for submission to the MTC and the CTC. The 1998 STIP and the 1997
Ira t Press
Vice President 617T Group update to the Authority's Strategic Plan provides an opportunity to infuse over
The Mechanics Bank $200 million in new state/federal (STIP), local (Measure C) and developer impact
Vice President fees for improvements to Contra Costa's transportation system. While the
Membership passage of Senator Kopp's STIP reform legislation (SB 45) may delay this
GaryW.Craft.AICP
Craft Consult'
Grcup process, it is clear that significant new funding is available and Contra Costa -
Vice President needs to be ready with it's priority list of"regionally significant" projects.
Events
Vicky De young
Office ProcernI.-lcent We understand that the Authority intends to adopt and circulate various draft
GruDbaEvi-s proposals to MTC and the Regional Committees for review and consideration
Vice President over the next month. Funding Scenario #6, attached to Issue Paper#3 - 1998
Communications State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and 1997 Strategic Plan
John Leykam
Major Gifts Officer Update, appears to match Contra Costa's "bid target" in the draft 1998 Fund
Saint Marys C Itece Estimate that was recently released by Caltrans. The scenario proposes to fund
Executive Director a number of priority projects that were identified by the Council in our letter of
Jim Jakel December 20, 1996. The Council supports all of the proposed projects.
The Council continues to believe, however, that Route 4 west must be improved
to full freeway standards, as called for in the voter approved Expenditure Plan
for Measure C, and that the Route 4/160 interchange, which links to the proposed
Route 4 Bypass are critically important projects that need to be completed. In
addition, the Council feels that every effort should be made to utilize regional
bridge toll funds (Regional Measure 1) for the 680 HOV lane project before any
local transportation sales tax (Measure C) funds are expended on this project.
Recognizing that the newly formed Bay Area Toll Bridge Authority has yet to
issue a Fund Estimate or identify procedures to program toll revenues for
projects such as this, we understand the need for an interim strategy.
® This let•,erneac cr;ntea er.recyciea Pacer
f �
John E. Marquez, Chair
September 17, 1997
Page Two
In this regard, we propose the following actions/changes to the proposed scenarios:
1. Route 4 West (Phase I1). Commit, by resolution, that CCTA will
continue actions oriented at completion of the Route 4 west freeway
project (Phase II) from future STIP and other sources before Contra
Costa's local sales tax (Measure C) expires in the year 2009. In
addition, initiate procedures as may be appropriate to amend MTC's
Regional Transportation Program (RTP) to included Route 4 west
freeway project. It may also be appropriate to initiate supplemental
environmental review to environmentally clear the full freeway project
between Cummings Skyway and Interstate 80.
2. Bridge toll revenues. Indicate, by resolution, CCTA's intent that the
most appropriate source of funding for work on the approaches to the
Benicia-Martinez and Carquenez bridges (as defined in the statutes) is
bridge toll revenues. In this regard, the proposed allocation of Measure
C funds to the 1-680 HOV lane project should be footnoted to reference
said Resolution.
3. Measure C Commuterway funds. Anticipating that the Bay Area Toll
Bridge Authority will ultimately concur that the 1-680 (and 1-80) HOV lane
project should be funded from bridge toll revenues, the Authority should
define those remaining projects that will be eligible for Measure C
Commuterway funds. At this point, it would appear that only the Route 4
east and/or the East County Corridor projects would qualify for these
funds.
4. Route 4/160 interchange. Transfer $15.0 million in STIP funds from
the Railroad interchange project to the Route 4/160 interchange in
Antioch and replace the transferred STIP funds with Measure C funds
(BART, Route 4 east and/or Commuterway).
As you are aware, the Council has long advocated improvements to Route 4, in both west and
east county, as the highest priority unfunded transportation need in Contra Costa County. As
indicated in our letter of December 20, 1996, this important economic corridor links the three
major geographical areas of our county and must be improved if Contra Costa is to remain
economically competitive with the Bay Area and the rest of California. All of Route 4 must be
improved to freeway standards (as envisioned in the Expenditure Plan for Measure C) to ensure
the safe and free movement of people, goods and services in the corridor.
John E. Marquez, Chair
September 17, 1997
Page Three
As indicated in our last letter, we appreciate the Authority's leadership in advancing project
development work on the critically important Route 4 projects. We stand ready to support and
assist the CCTA in advocating funding through the MTC and CTC hearing processes.
Very Truly Yours,
Tom McCracken, President
Contra Costa Council
TM/pw
cc: Congressman George Miller
Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher
State Senator Richard Rainey
Assemblyman Tom Torlakson
Assemblywoman Lynne Leach
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Larry Dahms, MTC
Sharon Brown, MTC
City of Hercules
City of Martinez
City of Concord
City of Pittsburg
City of Antioch
Caltrans District 4
TRANSPAC
WCCTAC
TRANSPLAN
Conference of Mayors
Public Managers Association
Sunne Wright McPeak, Bay Area Council
Guy Bjerke, Homebuilders Association
John Dalrymple, Central Labor Council
Coalition of Labor and Business
John Wolfe, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association
Darlene Houk, Contra Costa Association of Realtors
Jerry R. Fish, Delta Association of Realtors
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: September 24, 1997
TO: Members, Board of Supervisors
FROM: Dennis M. Barry, AICP, Interim Director of Community Development
by, Steven L. Goetz, Transportation Planning Division
SUBJECT: 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program
Attached for your information is a certified copy of Item D.3. from the 9/23/97 Board of
Supervisors meeting which reflects the Board's action.
Also please find attached a Contra Costa Transportation Authority report dated September
19,1997 which contains some additional information requested at yesterday's meeting.
It includes a table listing the range of projects that the Authority considered in developing
the 1998 STIP proposal.
The third attachment is a schedule of meetings where this subject will be discussed.
If you have questions on these attachments or would like to meet with staff directly on this
matter please call me at 335-1240.
jAsgoet\sbpbos.t9
Attachments
cc: w/attachments
V.Alexeeff,GMEDA
D. Barry, CDD
P. Roche, CDD.
D. Pulon,CDD
E.Vovakis,CDD
J. Bueren, PWD
M. Shiu, PWD
L.Tunison,PWD
Vi9 1 tti`, JJ I
0 CONTRA COSTA n7 SEP 22 PP9 5: rMEMORANDL M
TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY September 19, 1997
DEVELOP PENT DEPT
TO: County Administrator/City Managers
Public Works Directors
Planning Directors
Regional Transportation Planning Committee (RTPC) Staff
FROM: Robert K.McCleary,Executive Director
SUBJECT: Review of Draft 1998 State Transportation Improvement Pr ram(STIP)
priorities for Contra Costa: comments due no later than October 9, 1997.
BACKGROUND
As the Congestion Management Agency(CMA) for Contra Costa, the Authority must
submit proposals to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission(MTC) for inclusion in the
1998 STEP. Over the past several months Authority and local staffs have worked cooperatively
to fashion a set of proposals which follow MTC's rules, and are constrained to the funding limit
established by the California Transportation Commission --approximately$100 million.
AUTHORITY ACTION
At its September 17, 1997 meeting the Authority adopted a draft set of proposals identified
as Funding Scenario#6. These proposals are being transmitted to MTC today as Contra Costa's
initial draft submission. Final project priorities will be submitted following the Authority's
October 15, 1997 meeting.
The Authority also considered,but did not adopt, an alternative funding proposal (Scenario
6A), which was proposed by Supervisors Gerber and Canciamilla. To facilitate discussion,the
Authority directed that it also be circulated for comment along with Funding Scenario#6. The
Supervisors' proposal was discussed by the Authority's Technical Coordinating Committee
(TCC) on Thursday September 18, following the Authority meeting. Individual TCC members
may wish to summarize the TCC discussion for their respective regional RTPC's and agencies.
Also attached for your review is a comment letter from the Contra Costa Council,which they
requested to be circulated with this material.
OUTSTANDING ISSUES
While there appears to be a general consensus about the set of projects to be considered for
funding,three major issues remain: (1)the likelihood of obtaining Regional Measure 1 (bridge
toll) funds for funding all or a portion of the I-680 HOV lanes; (2)the level of STEP funding
allocated to the Route 4 Bypass in East County; and(3) the possibility that the BART Advanced
Automated Train Control (ATCC)could require a higher level of commitment than the$10
L
RTPCs and Interested Parties
September 19, 1997
Page 2
million set aside in the draft proposal.
1. Potential Applicability of Regional Measure 1 Funds to the I-680 HOV Lanes
There was considerable discussion about the potential for funding the I-680 HOV lanes from
Regional Measure 1 funds, since that toll increase will continue in perpetuity, after completion of
designated Regional Measure 1 (RM 1)projects. There was a general consensus that RM 1
funding should be pursued, at least for the portion of the project north of Route 4, which is
designated as a"bridge approach" in the statutes. However, because there is no assurance that
RMI funds can be obtained for the project, Central County representatives strongly
recommended that the project be fully programmed now for delivery by 2002,consistent with
Funding Scenario#6. This recommendation was based on the findings in the traffic study done
for the new Benicia-Martinez Bridge, which suggested that the HOV lanes were a higher priority
than, and should be constructed in advance of, the new bridge. East County representatives
advocated Scenario#6A, which phased the project. An initial $10 million phase would be
earmarked for STIP funding, with the balance to be constructed with RM 1 funds.
Staff noted that obtaining a specific commitment of RM I funds would be problematic
before 1999. SB 226 (Kopp) was just enacted this year, transferring authority over the Bay Area
tolls to MTC —including the RM1 program. That bill requires MTC to develop a financial plan
for completing the RM1 projects and submit it to the Legislature by December 31, 1998. The bill
also lists the specific projects to be funded from RM1. In staff's reading of the legislation,any
other projects would have to be added by statute in order to be funded. Given the intense
legislative debate over the funding of toll bridge seismic retrofit, and the debate over protecting
RM 1 funding,the 1999 legislative session is probably the earliest at which statutory action could
be considered for adding projects. We also do not know whether sufficient funds would be
available in a timely manner for non-RMI projects.
2. STIP Fundina Level for the Route 4 Bypass
The scenario proposed by Supervisors Gerber and Canciamilla, and endorsed by East County
representatives,presumes.that approximately three-quarters of the funding for the I-680 HOV
lanes can be deferred beyond 2005, and/or replaced by RM1 funds. Based on this proposal,
Scenario 6A would allocate an additional $11.5 million in STIP funds to the Route 4 Bypass,
changing the project to which the funds are allocated from a segment of the Bypass expressway
($7.5 million in Scenario 6)to the Route 4/160/Bypass interchange($19 million). Both
proposals would provide approximately 50 percent of the project funding from the fee program,
consistent with direction given by the Authority's Administration and Projects Committee
(APC)
RTPCs and Interested Parties
September 19, 1997
Page 3
3. Funding for the BART Advanced Automatic Train Control Proiect
Both Scenarios identify$10 million for the BART Advanced Automatic Train Control
Project. However, Contra Costa's "fair share"of the full project, as currently costed out by
BART, would be approximately$12 million. The Authority recognized that MTC may allocate
the entire$12 million for this "regional"project, and we may wish to plan for that possibility.
IMPACT OF PENDING SENATE BILL 45
Senate Bill 45 (Kopp) is on the Governor's desk awaiting signature. Should the bill be
enacted it would have a significant impact on the 1998 STIP. Submittal of projects to MTC
would be delayed, the fund estimate would be modified and some of the rules for project
submission would be changed.
ATTACHMENTS FOR REVIEW
1. Draft Funding Scenario#6 as adopted by the Authority
2. Draft Funding Scenario#6A, as proposed by Supervisors Gerber and Canciamilla
3. Issue Paper#3, revised on 9/19/97 to reflect the Authority discussion
4. Letter of September 17, 1997 from the Contra Costa Council, commenting on the 1998
STIP.
1
N in M d
N 0
h
PC Q '�
F
O
n.
Cd
Q O V1 N G
8 t�
o o C
WDA
U o 0
kn
U C Neneq
a� Pw
N 0
F ami
C �C 00 M
M
E M 8 0 d
C b
�U w 8 �
M
aa. n :° o�G CSO Q vai .s vai E $ c
0
1: frd aIPPD La
z
Vii:
a
r.
'
b_ �
w w w w w `
R;
H H' R ;
PC
Ate. a ;
�U
N � d
Cc,edo
OU o r t- N
en
en
o 0 0 en a C7
bti
3 $ o
too
lot
v� a vai p`�q ° ��� •� a 'aQ
�p �t
• i
7 (These principles were proposed by Supervisors Gerber and Canciamilla
as part of their Funding Scenario#6A proposal)
PRINCIPLES FOR 1998 STIP PROJECT LIST
1. Address all high priority transportation needs consistent with current STIP Bid Target of
$100 million, existing legislation,and Measure C revenue estimates.
2. Maintain CCTA practice of phasing implementation of large projects to match
transportation needs with available revenues.
3. Consistent with CCTA Resolution 95-43-P which directs CCTA to seek Regional
Measure 1 funds for the I-680 HOV Lane project.
4. Reaffirm CCTA Resolution 95-43-P which finds that "newly available Commuterway
funds could be programmed in future Strategic Plans for projects on Route 4 in eastern
Contra Costa to encourage the use of Route 4 rather than local arterials."
{
1998 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM(STIP)
AND
1997 STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE
ISSUE PAPER#3
PROPOSED PROJECT PRIORITIES FOR SUBMISSION TO MTC
Selecting Candidate Projects
Since January 1997,the Transportation Authority has been working on setting priorities for new
capital projects for the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program(STIP). The majority of
the new STIP programming capacity will be state Flexible Congestion Relief(FCR)funds.
Traditionally these funds have been earmarked for capacity enhancements to the state highway
system, although capacity-increasing improvements to local arterials and rail transit are also
eligible.
In order to coordinate funding sources,the Authority prepares its Strategic Plan update in concert
with the STIP,thus creating an opportunity to integrate Measure C and state FCR funding. In
adopting the 1995 Strategic Plan, the Authority identified improvements to Route 4 East and
West and the HOV lanes on I-680 as its primary focus in seeking additional Regional Measure 1,
state, and federal funds. Notwithstanding this existing policy, the Authority issued a call for
projects in January 1997. A list of candidate projects of countywide significance in addressing
congestion, safety and interregional connectivity problems was developed, thereby establishing a
"pool"of projects from which to choose,based on available funding.Twenty eight(28)projects
totaling approximately$500 million were received. The projects were scored using both MTC-
proposed criteria and a set of criteria approved by the Authority. The results of that scoring are
included in Appendix A to this issue paper.
The Overall Process at the State Level
State law prescribes a complex biennial process to program projects for state and federal funds.
First of all,the Department of Transportation(Caltrans)proposes a draft Fund Estimate,which
after review,is-adopted by the California Transportation Commission(CTC). The fund estimate
identifies, for each county in the state,the amount of funds (or"bid target"),that it can expect to
receive in the upcoming seven year State Transportation Improvement Program(STIP). The
calculation is based on a series of four year funding periods,including any"deficits"that may
carry over from earlier periods. In the Bay Area,each county then selects a list of projects,
submits the list to MTC,which in turn adopts a Regional Transportation Improvement Program
(RTIP)for submission to the CTC. Following staff analysis and public testimony,the CTC
adopts the STIP.
1998 STIP&1997 Strategic Plan
Issue Paper#3
Draft 9/19/97
R
Modifications to this -year's Process
The development of a fund estimate and associated rules for"bidding"projects has been
unusually complicated this year. Initially the CTC had expressed its intent to speed up the entire
process by moving up its adoption of the STIP by three months, so that the high balance in the
state highway account could be spent down as quickly as possible. That plan was vetoed by the
legislative leadership because it would have interfered with the delicate negotiations over
funding seismic retrofit. In the meantime, the statutory deadline for release of a draft fund
estimate was ignored, so the MTC made an educated guess about the bay Area's "bid target".
The Authority was instructed by MTC to submit a priority list of projects totaling$50-$70
million by the beginning of September. However, following approval of the state budget in
August, Caltrans released a draft fund estimate which was much lamer than most observers had
predicted. Assuming final approval of the Fund Estimate at the September 18 CTC meeting,
Contra Costa may bid on$100 million (which represents 110% of our county minimum).
Prior Action by the Authority
The Authority's Technical Coordinating Committee worked over the summer to prepare a
priority list of projects that would be consistent with the MTC-established bid target of$50-70
million. At its August 21 meeting the TCC recommended a series of projects to be funded at the
$50 million, $60 million and$70 million levels. Following the TCC action, Caltrans released a
much more robust fund estimate which earmarked$100 million for Contra Costa. The
Authority's Administration and Projects Committee(APC)took up the matter on September 4
and recommended that the TCC explore additional programming consistent with the higher Fund
Estimate. Specifically the APC directed:
1. The$50 million and$60 million scenarios should be dropped.
2. A$70 million scenario should be developed to depict the I-680 HOV lanes fully funded
with Measure C funds.
3. Additional priority lists should be established at the$80 million,$90 million and$100
million levels.
4. Funding proposals should be restricted to the narrower set of projects included in the .
TCC's recommendations,rather than the universe of projects included in Appendix A.
5. The revised,proposals should be brought to the Authority's September 17 meeting for
review,-thereafter circulated for comment,with final action slated for October.
Measure C Baseline Proiects
Many of the projects are eligible to be funded from either Measure C or STIP funds-thus
affording a certain amount of flexibility. The draft funding scenario assumes that a set of
"baseline"projects will be Measure C funded as part of the 1997 Strategic Plan as discussed
below:
1998 STIP&1997 Strategic Plan
Issue Paper#3
Draft 9/19197
ATTACHMENT A
1998 STIP&1997 Strategic Plan
Issue Paper#2
Draft 8126197
Southwest Arterials Measure C category: the remaining unprogrammed funds in this category
($300,000), would be available for additional programming as recommended by SWAT.
I-680 Auxiliary Lanes in Southwest County: $1 million would be programmed in the Strategic
Plan to continue project development by preparing a project Study Report (PSR), and initiating
the environmental process.
Gateway Lamorinda Measure C category: the financial analysis assumes that the School Bus
Program would continue through the life of the Measure,leaving a balance of approximately$2
million for additional project programming in the 1997 Strategic Plan.
In summary, all of the scenarios fully program the Route 4(west), GatewayALamorinda and the
Southwest Arterials categories. Project categories fully programmed in prior Strategic Plans
include I-680(TRANSPAC),Camino Pablo, and Regional Trails. Therefore, the only categories
with some(limited) funds remaining to be programmed in future Strategic Plan updates would be
the I-680(SWAT), Commuterway, Route 4 (east), and BART categories.
The Authority's draft Funding Scenarios
At its September 17, 1997 meeting the Authority adopted Funding Scenario#6 (at the full $100
million) as its draft proposal for submission to MTC. In addition, it directed that an alternative
proposal submitted by two of the Authority members (Scenario#6A)be circulated for comment
as well. Final action is slated for the Authority's October 15, 1997 meeting.
A final note: if SB45 is signed by the Governor, the fund estimate would again change. Funds
for project development funds would be included into the STIP,boosting annual totals available,
but requiring higher allocations to individual projects to cover state-funded engineering.
Moreover, SB45 would provide for a six year 1998 STIP followed by a four year STIP in 2000.
The schedule for the 1998 STIP would likely slip by 2-3 months.
Appendix A- Project Scoring Results
1998 STIP&1997 Strategic Plan
Issue Paper#3
Draft 9/19197
STIP Candidate Project Tracking
MTC Score
STIP Final
Maximum Final Contra
Potential MTC Costa
M Sponsor Project Request Score Score
Advanced Automatic Train Control
1 BART Communication based train control system(') 47,100,000 67.0- 44.0
2 CCTA 1-680 HOV Lane Pro ect:Route 242 to Marina Vista 23,000,000 60.0 27.0
State Route 4/Railroad Avenue Interchange-Upgrade
Interchange,freeway widening to west of Loveridge with
3 CCTA provisions for BART 0 50,000,000 53.0 43.0
State Route 4 Bypass Project-Two lanes between Lone
4 Bypass Authority Tree Way and Balfour Avenue-Segment 2 5,000,000 52.0 59.0
State Route 4 High Occupancy Vehicle(HOV)Lane
Widening from Bailey Road to Railroad Avenue-HOV
5 ICCTA and mixed flow lanes with provisions for BART 23,000,000 52.0 46.0
Richmond n ermo a Transfer Station-Facilities wd
6 City of Richmond access upgrade and enhanoemen?) 1,000,000 52.0 2.0
SR-4/SR-160/State Route 4 Bypass-State Route 4
7 Bypass Authority New Interchange Project and expressway-Segment 1 15,000,000 50.0 58.0
btate Route 4 From umm Kgs IsWay to -OMER
8 CCTA Highway(Phase 1) 30,000,000 47.4 60.0
':ate Route 4 from Cummings 3RVWiy to e
9 City of Hercules full freeway standard(Phase 2) 82,000,000 47.0 57.0
State Route 24 Auxiliary Lane-Eastbound Gateway
On-ramp to Brookwood Off-ramp-Auxiliary Lanes/
10 City of Orinda Class i bike path 3,000,000 43.8 20.0
Martinez ntermo a ase --A
o pa ung
11 City of Martinez spaces,pedestrian bridge,other Improvements(2) 10,600,000 43.8 18.0
12 City of San Ramon Alcosta Interchange-Upgrade existing Interchange 8,600,000 42.4 27.0
State Route 4 Interchange Improvement Project:
13 ICIty of Antioch Hillcrest Avenue-Upgrade existting Interchange 11,200,000 38.0 28.0
San Pablo Avenue Corridor Transit System
14 AC Transit Improvements-TSM and TDM Improvements 2,000,000 38.0 5.0
Extension of Panoramic Drive between the North
Concord BART station and Willow Pass Road-Provides
15 City of Concord seoond access for BART station 6,400,000 33.0 43.0
Alhambra Widening Phase 2&3-Widening to four lanes
16 City of Martinez between SR4 and McAlvery Drive 11,500,000 30.0 18.0
Clayton Road/State Route 242(Northbound)On-ramp-
17 City of Concord New on-ramp 7,000,000 29.0 25.0
Ygnacio Valley/lOrker Pass Road Widening-Road
18 of Concord widening between Cowell Road and Myrtle Drive 6,500,000 23A 31.0
Buchanan Road Bypass Project-Two lane segment
19 10tty of Pittsburgbetween I(irker Pass Road and James Donlon Boulevard 15,100,000 22.0 1 41.0
TOTAL 358,000,000
1) This is the project total not the Contra Costa County Share
2) Submitted for PSTIP
8/26197
STIP3a.XLS
STIP Candidate Project Tracking
CCTA Score ----
STIP Final Final
Maximum MTC Contra
Potential Score Costa
M Sponsor Project Request Score
State Route 4 From Cummings Skyway to 1410-Divided
1 CCTA -Highway Phase i)__ 30,000,000 47.4 60.0
State Route 4 Bypass Project-Two lanes between Lone
2 Bypass Authority Tree Way and Balfour Avenue-Segment 2 5,000,000 52.0 59.0
SR-NSR-160/State Route 4 Bypass-State Route 4
3 Bypass Authority New Interchange Project and expressway-Segment 1 15,000,000 50.0 58.0
State Route 4 From Cummings Skyway to 1-80-4 lane
4 City of Hercules full freeway standard Phase 2 82,000,000 47.0 57.0
State Route 4 High Occupancy Vehicle(HOV)Lane
Widening from Bailey Road to Railroad Avenue-HOV
5 CCTA and mixed flow lanes with provisions for BART 23,000,000 52.0 46.0
Advanced Automatic Train Control(AATC)-
6 BART Communication based train control system(') 47,100,000 67.0 44.0
State Route 4/Raliroad Avenue Interchange-Upgrade
interchange,freeway widening to west of Loveridge with
7 jCCTA provisions for BART 50,000,000 53.0 1 43.0
E.ctenston of Panoramic Drive between the North
Concord BART station and Willow Pass Road-Provides
8 City of Concord second access for BART station 6,400,000 33.0 43.0
Buchnan Road Bypass Project-Two lane segment
between Kirker Pass Road and James Donlon
9 City of PittsburgBoulevard 15,100,000 22.0 41.0
Ygnaclo Valley/Kirker Pass Road Widening-Road
10 City of Concord widening between Cowell Road and Myrtle Drive 6,500,000 23.4 31.0
State Route 4 Interchange Improvement Project:
11 City of Antioch Hillcrest Avenue-Upgrade exisiting Interchange 11,200,000 38.0 28.0
12 CCTA 1.680 HOV Lane Project:Route 242 to Marina Vista 23,000,000 60.0 27.0
13 City of San Ramon Aicosta interchange-Upgrade existing Interchange 8,600,000 42A 27.0
Clayton RoadlState Route 242(Northbound)On-ramp-
14 City of Concord New 7,000,000 29.0 25.0
State Route 24 Auxiliary Lane-East bound Gateway
On-ramp to Brookwood Off-ramp-Auxiliary lanes/Class 1
15 City of Odnda bike path 3,000,000 43.8 20.0
Martinez Intermodal Phase 3-Addition of 425 parking
16 City of Martinez spaces,pedestrian bridge,other improvementsM 10,600,000 43.8 18.0
Alhambra Widening Phase 2&3-Widening to four lanes
17 City of Martinez between SR4 and McAlyery Drive 11,500,000 30.0 18.0
Sun Pablo Avenue Corridor Transit System
18 AC Transit Improvements-TSM and TDM improvements 2,000,000 38.0 5.0
Richmond Intermodal Transfer Station-Facilities and
19 1CIty of Richmond aocess upgrade and erimmxneriP 1,000,000 52.0 2.0
TOTAL 358,000,000
1) This Is the project total not the Contra Costa County Share.
2) Submitted for PSTIP
8/26197
St(p3.x(s
CONTRA COSTA
C O U N C I L
2694 Bishop Drive, Suite 121
San Ramon, CA 94583
Phone: (510) 866-6666
Fax: (510) 866-8647
President September 17, 1997
Tom McCracken
General Manager
Sunvalley Shopping Center
Immediate Past President
Linda Best
Partner John E. Marquez, Chair
Hasseltine Best Contra Costa Transportation Authority
Vice President 1340 Treat Blvd., Suite 150
Task Forces
William R.Gray Walnut Creek, CA 94596
President
William R.Gray and Company
Dear Chairman Marquez:
Vice President
Task Forces
Tomi Van de Brooke This is a follow up to our letter of December 20, 1996 regarding priorities for the
Managing Director,Contra Costa
The PBN Company 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). We appreciate the
Vice President opportunity to participate in efforts to develop local consensus on a priority list of
Finance&Administration projects for submission to the MTC and the CTC. The 1998 STIP and the 1997
ira Hiltyer
Vice President.IMT Group update to the Authority's Strategic Plan provides an opportunity to infuse over
Vi
The Mechanics Bank $200 million in new state/federal (STIP), local (Measure C) and developer impact
Vice President fees for improvements to Contra Costa's transportation system. While the
Membership passage of Senator Kopp's STIP reform legislation (SB 45) may delay this
Gary W.Craft,AICP
Craft Consulting Group process, it is clear that significant new funding is available and Contra Costa
Vice President needs to be ready with it's priority list of"regionally significant"projects.
Events
Vicky De Young
Office Property Agent We understand that the Authority intends to adopt and circulate various draft
Grubb&Ellis proposals to MTC and the Regional Committees for review and consideration
Vice President over the next month. Funding Scenario #6, attached to Issue Paper#3 - 1998
Communications State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and 1997 Strategic Plan
John Leykam
Major Gifts Officer Update, appears to match Contra Costa's "bid target" in the draft 1998 Fund
Saint Mary's College Estimate that was recently released by Caltrans. The scenario proposes to fund
Executive Director a number of priority projects that were identified by the Council in our letter of
Jim Jakel December 20, 1996. The Council supports all of the
pp proposed projects.
- The Council continues to believe, however, that Route 4 west must be improved
to full freeway standards, as called for in the voter approved Expenditure Plan
for Measure C, and that the Route 4/160 interchange, which links to the proposed
Route 4 Bypass are critically important projects that need to be completed. In
addition, the Council feels that every effort should be made to utilize regional
bridge toll funds (Regional Measure 1) for the 680 HOV lane project before any
local transportation sales tax (Measure C) funds are expended on this project.
Recognizing that the newly formed Bay Area Toll Bridge Authority has yet to
issue a Fund Estimate or identify procedures to program toll revenues for
projects such as this, we understand the need for an interim strategy.
This letterhead printed on recycled paper
w
John E. Marquez, Chair
September 17, 1997
Page Two
In this regard, we propose the following actions/changes to the proposed scenarios:
1. Route 4 West (Phase II). Commit, by resolution, that CCTA will
continue actions oriented at completion of the Route 4 west freeway
project (Phase II) from future STIP and other sources before Contra
Costa's local sales tax (Measure C) expires in the year 2009. In
addition, initiate procedures as may be appropriate to amend MTC's
Regional Transportation Program (RTP) to included Route 4 west
freeway project. It may also be appropriate to initiate supplemental
environmental review to environmentally clear the full freeway project
between Cummings Skyway and Interstate 80.
2. Bridge toll revenues. Indicate, by resolution, CCTA's intent that the
most appropriate source of funding for work on the approaches to the
Benicia-Martinez and Carquenez bridges (as defined in the statutes) is
bridge toll revenues. In this regard, the proposed allocation of Measure
C funds to the 1-680 HOV lane project should be footnoted to reference
said Resolution.
3. Measure C Commuterway funds. Anticipating that the Bay Area Toll
Bridge Authority will ultimately concur that the 1-680 (and 1-80) HOV lane
project should be funded from bridge toll revenues, the Authority should
define those remaining projects that will be eligible for Measure C
Commuterway funds. At this point, it would appear that only the Route 4
east and/or the East County Corridor projects would qualify for these
funds.
4. Route 4/160 interchange. Transfer $15.0 million in STIP funds from
the Railroad interchange project to the Route 4/160 interchange in
Antioch and replace the transferred STIP funds with Measure C funds
(BART, Route 4 east and/or Commuterway).
As you are aware, the Council has long advocated improvements to Route 4, in both west and
east county, as the highest priority unfunded transportation need in Contra Costa County. As
indicated in our letter of December 20, 1996, this important economic corridor links the three
major geographical areas of our county and must be improved if Contra Costa is to remain
economically competitive with the Bay Area and the rest of California. All of Route 4 must be
improved to freeway standards (as envisioned in the Expenditure Plan for Measure C) to ensure
the safe and free movement of people, goods and services in the corridor.
f
John E. Marquez, Chair
September 17, 1997
Page Three
As indicated in our last letter, we appreciate the Authority's leadership in advancing project
development work on the critically important Route 4 projects. We stand ready to support and
assist the CCTA in advocating funding through the MTC and CTC hearing processes.
Very Truly Yours,
Tom McCracken, President
Contra Costa Council
TM/pw
cc: Congressman George Miller
Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher
State Senator Richard Rainey
Assemblyman Tom Torlakson
Assemblywoman Lynne Leach
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Larry Dahms, MTC
Sharon Brown, MTC
City of Hercules
City of Martinez
City of Concord
City of Pittsburg
City of Antioch
Caltrans District 4
TRANSPAC
WCCTAC
TRANSPLAN
Conference of Mayors
Public Managers Association
Sunne Wright McPeak, Bay Area Council
Guy Bjerke, Homebuilders Association
John-Dalrymple, Central Labor Council
Coalition of Labor and Business
John Wolfe, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association
Darlene Houk, Contra Costa Association of Realtors
Jerry R. Fish, Delta Association of Realtors
MEETING SCHEDULE FOR CCTA AND REGIONAL COMMITTEES
TVTC Wednesday, 09/24/97, 4:00 PM
WCCTAC Friday, 09/26/97, 8:30 AM
CCTA- Administration and Projects Committee Thursday, 10/02/97, 8:30 AM
SWAT Committee Monday, 10/06/97, 3:00 PM
TRANSPAC Thursday, 10/09/97, 9:00 AM
TRANSPLAN Committee Thursday, 10/09/97, 7:30 PM
Technical Coordinating Committee Friday, 10/10/97, 1:00`PM
CCTA Wednesday, 10/15/97, 7:00 PM
i