Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09221998 - C116 \yI s //6 'i✓ TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: Transportation Committee Cwa DATE: September 14, 1998 u' W SUBJECT: Reorganization of the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION CMMENDATIONS ACCEPT the report on the reorganization of bicycle committees (see Exhibit A); RETAIN the authority of the Board of Supervisor to administer the Transportation Development Act (TDA) Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Program and to make appointmentsto the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee (CBAC); and REFER to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, for review and comment, the reorganization of the composition of CBAC: Number of "anization EjePresentatives Cateaory Delta Pedalers 1 Citizen Diablo Cyclists 1 Citizen Different Spokes 1 Citizen East Bay Bicycle Coalition 1 Citizen Grizzly Peak Cyclists 1 Citizen Regional Bicycle Advisory Committee 1 Citizen Sierra Club Bicycle Section 1 Citizen Strada Sempre Duro 1 Citizen Valley Spokesmen 1 Citizen CCTA Citizen Advisory Committee 1 Citizen City/County Engineering Advisory Committee 1 Staff Contra Costa Transportation Authority 1 Staff East Bay Regional' Park District 1 Staff Metropolitan Transportation Commission 1 Staff RTPC TDM Program Managers 1 Staff CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES _RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF_BC�ARD COMMITTEE —APPROVE _OTHER SIGNATURES : ill Donna Gerber ACTION OF BOAR(J t7N , pt��- a i9ga APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A x-UNANIMOUS (ABSENT -- - - - - - TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: 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 Beau.'` 29, i c Orig: Community Development PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF Public Works, T.E. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee (via CDD) AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR GO-BIKE!Program Committee (via CDD) Health Services, Community Wellness and Prevention CCTA (via CDD) BY —, DEPUTY RTPCs (via CDD) City-County Engineers (via CDD) Reorganization of the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee September 14, 1998 Page Two FISCAL* IMPACT None to the General Fund. Additional County staff time may be required to support the activities of CBAC if it addresses issues beyond the scope of the TDA Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Program. A combination of Road funds and grant funds are used to cover staff costs. Grant funds will be exhausted by the end of the fiscal year. QU /R A.gjL,?N FG> I ENDAT€C1 ! On July 28, 1998, the Board of Supervisors received a proposal on bicycle committee reorganization and referred the proposal to the Transportation Committee (see Exhibit A). The reorganization proposal includes a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to delegate its responsibility for administration of the TDA Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Program to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (OCTA), including delegating the responsibility to appoint members to the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee (CBAC) and the responsibility to provide staff support for CBAC. The overall objective of the reorganization proposal is to integrate bicycle transportation issues into the countywide transportation planning and programming process administered by OCTA. Up to this paint,the bicycle-related activities of OCTA have included allocation of Measure C funds for regional bicycle and pedestrian trails, and allocation of Transportation Fund for Clean Air revenues and Surface Transportation Program/Congestion Management Air Quality funds for bicycle projects. For many years, the Board of Supervisors has been the designated body to submit recommendations on projects for the TDA Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Program to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). Pursuant to the requirements of MTC, the Board formed CBAC to assist the Board in making recommendations on projects to forward to MTC. More recently, County staff has worked with other committees to address bicycle safety and bicycle coordination issues (Safe Roads Safe Families and the GO-BIKE! Program committees, respectively). For the past several months, members of these bicycle committees have discussed the potential for reorganizing their structure to consolidate their activities and perform their functions more efficiently. Michael Jackson, the Countywide Bicycle Facilities Coordinator and staff to the GO-BIKE! Program, served as scribe for the group. The proposal represents the general consensus of the participants, although some participants have disagreements over certain aspects of the proposal. This proposal takes advantage of recent changes to MTC requirements that allow responsibility for the TDA program to be transferred to the county's congestion management agency, OCTA. On September 14, the Transportation Committee reviewed the proposal and received comment from interested parties. The primary issue for the Board of Supervisors is whether our responsibility for the TDA Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Program should be delegated to OCTA. Objections to the proposal were made by the City-County Engineers Advisory Committee, which reports to the Board and the Conference of Mayors. For many years, these engineers have worked with CBAC to prepare recommendations on the TDA program. The engineers believe the current administration of the TDA program works well and see no need to change it. The Transportation Committee found no compelling reason to delegate the Board's responsibility in this area. However, the Transportation Committee believes that improving bicycle transportation requires strong advocacy and consolidating existing bicycle committees would serve that purpose. Rather than endorse the specific proposal, the Transportation Committee recommends changing the composition of CBAC to include the representation sought by the existing bicycle committees. The Transportation Committee's recommendation is similar to the bicycle committee reorganization proposal, except it adds an appointment from the COTA Citizen Advisory Committee in- lieu of appointments from the RTPC Technical Advisory Committees (see comparison below). The Transportation Committee's recommendation would help integrate the activities of CBAC with the OCTA countywide transportation planning and programming process without increasing the size of CBAC. The reorganized CBAC would be free to address transportation issues involving the OCTA as well as safety issues of concern to its members. Proposed Bicycle B.O.S. Transportation ,Existina CBAC Co remittee Reoraanilation QofiLttee_R§cg tm nndation Sierra Club Sierra Club Sierra Club Valley Spokesman Valley Spokesman Valley Spokesman East Bay Bicycle Coalition East Bay Bicycle Coalition East Bay Bicycle Coalition Different Spokes Different Spokes Different Spokes Grizzly Peak Cyclists Grizzly Peak Cyclists Grizzly Peak'Cyclists Diablo Cyclists Diablo Cyclists Diablo Cyclists Unnamed bicycle org. Strada Sempre Duro Strada Sempre Duro Bicycle Industry Regional Bicycle Advisory Cte. Regional Bicycle Advisory Cte. Mayor's Conference Delta Pedalers Delta Pedalers East Bay Regional Parks* East Bay Regional Parks* East Bay Regional Parks* District 1 Appointment City-County Engineers* City-County Engineers* District 2 Appointment MTC* MTC* District 3 Appointment OCTA* OCTA* District A Appointment Regional TDM Program Managers* Regional TDM Program Managers* * 4 Total Members= 18 Total Members = 18 Total Members= 15 (*=staff representative) EXHIBIT A i GO BME1 MEMO DATE: July 28, 2998 TO: Transportation Committee FROM: Hchael Jackson, Countywide Bicycle Facilities Coordinator lloq SUBJECT: PROPOSED BICYCLE COMMTrUE REORGANIZATHJN There has been agreement among members of the County Ade Bicycle Advisory'Committee,the G4 BIKEi Subcommittee and the Safe Families Advisory Committee in favor ofoombining the work of these committees into one committee for the following reasons: 1, Increased involvement by members of the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee in the development and review of bicycle transportation grant applications. 2. Continued citizen involvement in bicycle safety and education matters that has ceased due to the end of the Safe Roads/Safe Families Advisory Committee last March 3. Economy of operation by combining the work of three separate committees regarding countywide bicycle transportation issues into one committee. 4. An opportunity to better integrate countywide bicycle transportation into the county's general transportation planning program and to more effectively involve municipalities into countywide bicycle transportation issues. After holding joint meetings on this proposed reorganization on May 24,June 12, and July 2E the committee members agreed that the new committee would be known as the Contra Crista Bicycle Committee(CCBC). It was also agreed that it would be desirable for the CCBC to begin work this fall. A major change in the CCBC over the existing Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee and the former Safe Roads/Safe Families Advisory Committee is that official members of the CCBC would be appointed by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority instead of the Board of Supervisors.Appointment of CCBC members by the CCTA instead of the BOS is viewed as being more appropriate since the purpose of the CCTA is to address countywide transportation planning and funding issues. There was concern expressed by some parties that the clout ofthe CCBC would be increased by having its members appointed by the BOS instead of the CCTA. Attached are, l) a description of the CCBC's composition, purpose, structure, and tasks; 2) a copy of MTC Resolution 875, which lists the requirements of a bicycle advisory committee; 3) answers to the most common questions raised by bicycle committee members during discussions of this proposal, and;4)policy recommendations related to this proposal. MR D:M1ACKDOCreorgIONdEM0 Attachments cc: Dick Anderson,Delta Pedalers Mike Anderson, CBAC, Bast Bay Regional Park District Julie Bueren, CCC Public Works Department Bart Carr, SR/SF Nick Can, CCC.Health Services Department Jack Champlin, CCC Health Services Department Mike Daley, CBAC,District 1 Representative Dara Douglas, Strada Sempre Duro Martin Engelmann;, CCTA Steve Fiala, CBAC, District 2 Representative Steven Goetz, CCC Community Development Department Michael Jackson, GO BXE! Derek Liecty, CBAC, Different Strokes Mark Lowery, GO BIKE! Subcommittee, City of Orinda Chris McCann, GC?BIKE! Subcommittee, Town of Danville Brian Mulligan, CBAC, District 3 Representative Cathy Nowicki, CBAC,Diable Cyclists John Ruzek, CBAC, Sierra Club- SF Bay Chapter Robert Richards, CBAC, Grizzly Peak Cyclists Y"ehuda Sherman, Safe Roads/Safe Families Advisory Committee, CBAC, EBBC .Dave Stoeffler, CBAC, Delta Pedalers Kathy Tate, CBAC, Valley Spokesmen Touring Club Chuck Tyler, CBAC, Dublin Cyclery John Templeton, Ga BIKE!Committee, City of Concord Jean Watts, Valley Spokesmen Touring Club CONTRA COSTA BICYCLE COMMITTEE COMPOSITION,PURPOSE, STRUCTURE,AND TASKS Recommended Composition* C3_rszaniz tF�,ion No. of RCprmntatiyCjof . oa Bicycle Organizations 9 Citizens 1. Delta Pedalers I Diable Cyclists 3. Different Spokes 4. East Bay Bicycle Coalition 5, Grizzly Peak Cyclists 5. Regional Bicycle Advisory Committee (REBAC) 7. Sierra Club Bicycle Section 8. Strada. Sempre Duro 9. Valley Spokesmen City/County Engineering Advisory Committee 1 Staff Centra Costa Transportation Authority 1 Staff CCBC Staff Support** 1 Staff East Bay Regional Park District 1 Staff Metropolitan Transportation Commission 1 Staff Regional Transportation Planning Committee 4 Staff' Transportation Demand Management Program Managers 1 Staff Total............................iii.,................................,....19 Representatives (9 citizens and 10 staff") *The proposed committee composition meets and exceeds the requirements of Resolution 875 of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. **The position would be appointed by the CCTA to provide administrative and technical support to the CCBC,consistent with the regWrements o�f AfX Resolution 875. This staff support could be equivalent to the functions now performed by the Countywide Bicycle Facilities Coordinator. It is anticipated that other local government staff could be designated by the CCTA to provide additional staff support for related work groups,if needed. 3 CCBC Purpose The purpose of the CCBC is to advise the CCTA on bicycle transportation issues. The desire of existing CBAC members is that this responsibility include the citizen's advisory functions as required by M`TC Resolution 875 as well as participation in the planning, implementation, and maintenance of facilities and programs designed to encourage the use of bicycling as a means of transportation in Contra Costa County. Consistent with this function is a desire among CBAC members to help ensure sensitivity to bicycle and pedestrian issues in the design and implementation of all projects funded by the OCTA which impact bicyclists and pedestrians. The CCBC's mandate may be expanded to include participation in the planning, implementation, and maintenance of facilities and programs designed to provide for pedestrian and disabled access in Contra Costa County at a future date. CCBC Structure To respond to OCTA referrals, the CCBC is divided into two working groups, 1)the Bicycle Facility Development Working Group; and 2) the Bicycle Safety, Education, Enforcement, and Promotion Working Group. Members would be assigned to at least one working group. Working group chairpersons would be named and working group activities could be assisted by non appointed members known as Friends of the CCBC. The existing functions of the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee would be assumed by the Bicycle Facility Development Working Group. The bicycle safety and education functions formally handled by the Safe Roads/Safe Families Advisory Committee would be assumed by the Bicycle Safety, Education, Enforcement, and Promotion Working Group. The functions of the GO BIKE? Subcommittee,which serves to review and comment on the activities of the GO BIKE? Program, on a quarterly basis, would be handled by the CCBC general body since GO BIKE? activities include subject areas covered by both CCBC working groups. Other working groups may be added as desired, including a pedestrian and disabled access working group. This structure is recommended to permit inclusion of all interested parties in the work of the CCBC without the committee becoming unwieldy. CCBC Tasks The following is a description of the functions of the two working groups and their potential tasks. Where municipal bicycle advisory committees have been established, the CCBC shall yield to the recommendations of the MBACs as it relates to countywide bicycling issues within such municipalities. 4 A. & W7p Farb J)epel=ment W bdd?ZZ GrptW-This working group will be responsible for reviewing the existing transportation network of Contra Costa County, identifying where improvements are needed to accommodate bicyclists, developing a list of bicycle facility improvements for the purpose of riding and storing bicycles, reviewing and recommending bicycle facility design standards, guidelines, and procedures, as well as working toward project implementation and maintenance. The BFDWG would also make recommendations regarding bicycle projects handed by the CCTA including the selection and prioritization of bicycle capital improvement proposals, identification of grant funding sources, development and review of bicycle transportation grant applications, consistent with the requirements of MTC Resolution 873. Typical tasks might include but not be limited to: 1. Blaen Rmd=- The Bicycle Facility Development Working Group will review and make recommendations on comprehensive bicycle transportation goals, objectives, and policies for the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CCTP) and for the general plans of interested jurisdictions within Contra Costa County. 2. Dual Mode Transoortation - The Bicycle Facility Development Working Group will review and make recommendations on the development and implementation of policies and programs in the CCTP designed to encourage the combination of bicycling and transit trips as a viable substitute to single occupant vehicle usage. 3. Bicycle Parking Facilities- The Bicycle Facility Development Working Group will review proposals for bicycle parking and related facilities including bicycle racks, bicycle lockers, showers, and related proposals funded by the CCTA or at the request of'the sponsoring jurisdiction. 4. CQnstructionand Maintenance - The Bicycle Facility Development Working Group will review and make recommendations regarding policies toward transportation construction and maintenance procedures for projects funded by the OCTA to ensure that bicycle access is not denied or unduly impeded. The BFDWG would participate in the development of policies and procedures to ensure that bikeway facilities are properly maintained. 5. Rc3d=nd Dcyelol2ment of Existing and Proposed Standards and Quidelings-The Bicycle Facility Development Working Group will review and make recommendations regarding bikeway facility components such as traffic control devices, multi-use trail design, bicycle parking and support facilities for interested jurisdictions. This includes ensuring that these features comply with state standards. 5 6. - The Bicycle Facility Development Working Group shall participate in the review, prioritization, and recommendations of bicycle/pedestrian projects submitted for funding from the Transportation Development Act program, the Bicycle Lane Account, the Transportation Fund for Clean Air, and/or other funding sources that involve the OCTA. The BFDWG may conduct field trips in order to review proposed bicycle grant applications and ask questions of the project proponents to clarify issues associated with projects. B -The BSEEP Working Group would continue and expand upon the efforts of former Safe Roads/Safe Families Advisory Committee in promoting bicycle safety and education issues. Typical tasks might include but not be limited to: 1. Assessing countywide bicycle crash and injury data and making recommendations on whether engineering, educational, or enforcement actions are needed to reduce the number and severity of such crashes and injuries. 2. Developing countywide bicycle safety education campaigns aimed at bicyclists of all ages as well as other road users. 3. Developing and implementing strategies to publicize the benefits and desirability of bicycle transportation. Such strategies may include marketing using electronic, print, outdoor and transit advertising, publications, and events such as Bike To Work Week. 4. Seeping the advice of the health, education, engineering, and law enforcement communities regarding proposed bicycle engineering, educational, safety, and enforcement initiatives. It is anticipated that many of the initiatives that CCBC will undertake will not fit neatly beneath a single subcommittee's purview. Therefore interaction will undoubtedly occur between the various subcommittees from time to time. 6 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RESOLUTION 875 Revised January 28, 1998 Bicycle Advisory Committee Requirements The county or congestion management agency shall establish a process for establishing project priorities. Each county and city is required to have a Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC)to review and/or prioritize TDA Article 3 bicycle projects and to participate in the development and review of comprehensive bicycle plans. (BACs are mandated by State Transportation Control Measure[STCM#9], adopted by MTC on November 28, 1990, MTC Resolution No. 2178, Revised). A city BAC shall be composed of at least 3 members who live or work in the city. More members may be added as desired. They will be appointed by the City Council. The City Manager will designate staff to provide administrative and technical support to the Committee. Cities under 10,000 population who have difficulty in locating a sufficient number of qualified members, may apply to MTC for exemption from these requirements. Cities over 10,000 population may also apply to MTC for exemption from the city BAC requirement if they can demonstrate that the countywide BAC provides for expanded city representation; A county BAC shall be composed of at least 5 members who live or work in the county. More members may be added as desired. Members will be appointed by the County Board of Supervisors and/or Congestion Management Agency(CMA). The county or congestion management agency executive/administrator will designate staff to provide administration and technical support to the Committee. (Note: The intent is that BACs be composed of bicyclists/pedestrians.) 7 Questions and Answers Regarding the Proposed Contra Costa Bicycle',Committee 1. Question: Currently members of the current Coun"ide Bicycle Advisory Committee are appointed by the Board of,supervisors. Under the proposal for the Contra Costa Bicycle Committee(CCBC,), members will be nominated by the Regional Transportation Planning Committees(RTPCs) and appointed by the Contra Costa Transportation.Authority(CCTA). What are the reasons for this change and is this change of procedure consistent',with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission(MTC) requirements for establishment of bicycle advisory committees? Answer: The OCTA is the countywide transportation planning and funding agency in Contra Costa County. The B.TPCs represent local cities and help develop transportation policy on a regional basis. Having the RTPCs submit CCBC nominations to the OCTA, who lwould appoint bicycle committee members is designed to better involve the cities, the regional transportation planning committees and the OCTA in countywide bicycle transportation matters and to integrate bicycle transportation with other county transportation planning matters. This appointment procedure complies with MTC Resolution 875, which governs the establishment of bicycle advisory committees(BAC), because this resolution permits BAC members to be appointed by either the County Board of Supervisors or the Congestion Management Agency, The CCTA is the congestion management agency for Contra Costa County, 2. Q: Why is the proposed committee being called the Contra Costa Bicycle Committee instead of the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee? A: The American Heritage College Dictionary, Third Edition, defines the word advisory as, "Empowered to advise: an advisory committee," or"relating to or containing advise: an advisory memorandum." The role of a bicycle advisory committee powers is viewed as being merely limited to providing advice to staff and/or elected officials on bicycling issues. The GO BIKE! Subcommittee, being composed of a roughly equal number of citizens and staff members, actively works on developing and promoting bicycle transportation in Contra Costa County. The inclusion of the functions of the Gd BIKEI Subcommittee into an expanded countywide bicycle group broadens the role of that group beyond the merely advisory,therefore the name "Contra Costa Bicycle Committee" is seen to be a more accurate description of the committee's purpose. The CCBC would retain the advisory function mandated by the Resolution 875 of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission so that the County does not lose its eligibility to receive grant funds. The CCBC would provide an opportunity for citizen members to serve beyond merely advising staff members and elected officials on bicyclist's needs, but to assist in the development and implementation of adopted recommendations. Citizen members would not be compelled to participate beyond serving in an advisory capacity, but would have an opportunity',for further 8 participation in projects that interest them. 3. Q. There are 1.9 slots reserved for appointed members plus it is anticipated that unappointed persons will assist in the committee's work. Are 19 appointed members too many to have a manageable committee? A: No, if based on the experiences of other bicycle committees. The Toronto City Cycling Committee is composed of 23 appointed members and their work has helped earn Toronto the title of the Best Bicycling City in North America, as bestowed by Bicycling Magazine in 1995. The Transportation Research Board's Committee on Bicycling has 29 members(25 from the U.S. and 4 foreign country membership slots). The Committee on Bicycling has been very effective in encouraging research into bicycle transportation issues,judging by the increase in papers and presentations over a fifteen year period. Several factors are present that should reduce anticipated inertia due to the sheer volume of participants. First, much of the work of this committee will be done at the working group level. Most members will likely focus their efforts into specific issues such as bicycle safety, bikeway standards and guidelines, or individual project proposals, rather than displaying equal interest and involvement in every item that the CCBC addresses. Second, working groups will likely hold their smaller meetings apart from general committee meetings. Some members may participate primarily in working groups rather than attend the general committee meetings. 'Third,because not every appointed committee member will have a perfect attendance record it is unlikely that all 19 appointed members will attend every CCBC general meeting. The number of appointees to the CCBC is based on a principle of inclusiveness to ensure receiving input from a variety of sources. The largest source of members come from bicycle organizations. The nine appointments from the bicycle organizations result from the recommendation that all bicycle organizations operating in the County be represented. The ten remaining appointments come from staff members who represent a variety of organizations who affect county bicycle transportation issues including the 18 municipalities, the four regional transportation planning committees, the City/County Engineering Advisory Committee, and various countywide and regional government agencies. Appointed staff members will have responsibility for development and/or implementation of bicycle transportation programs within their respective organizations. It is anticipated that most staff persons will be bicyclists as well. Policy Recommendations 1. N=e C�-The proposed committee would be known as the Contra Costa.Bicycle Committee(CCBC)instead of the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee. The reason for this change is that the committee would take a more active role than merely advising$affinembers on 9 bicycling issues by actively participating in program development, facility planning, and project implementation. 2. CCBC =-Membership should be focused, on local bicycle organizations and government agencies primarily involved in transportation issues. Groups such as law enforcement and education should be consulted when necessary(The preceding sentence was tentatively agreed to but it was recognized that the level of involvement of the law enforcement and education communities in the CCBC was dependent on the final committee composition, the frequency of addressing law enforcement and education issues, and willingness of law enforcement and education community representatives to participate in CCBC matters). 3. ambershig -Provisions are to be made for encouraging regular attendance of appointed members, designating alternatives, and replacement of non-participating members. 4. Consea=L2ecision 1 akirri - CCBC recommendations are to be made by consensus rather than by separating participants in terms of voting and non-voting members. 5. &1mice&glua:auwit�ciencv•The composition of the CCBC strives to include as many relevant groups and individuals in the CCBC without becoming unwieldy. Strategies to achieve this balance include forming CCBC"Working Groups"to handle time consuming',or special tasks, and dividing CCBC participants between the appointed members and another group composed of unappointed members. It is suggested that the unappointed members be known as"Friends of the CCBC". This is similar to the designation of unofficial members of the Transportation Research Board's Committee on Bicycling(Friends of the Committee on Bicycling) and similar to the concept of"Friends of the Court." 6. Bra--n Act Cern is rye -CCBC; meetings are to be held in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Brown Act including holding meetings that are open to the public, agendas prepared in advance, provisions for public comment and public comment periods. 7. 44pointments Process The Contra Costa Transportation Authority(OCTA)will appoint members to serve on the CCBC. The OCTA and the Board of Supervisors(BOS), through the CCTA are to be kept informed of CCBC activities. The OCTA will appoint representatives from all appropriate local bicycle organizations that care to be represented on the CCBC. Appropriate local bicycle organizations are defined as those organizations that regularly hold bicycle rides through Contra Costa County or who advocate for improved bicycle transportation facilities here. Cities will be represented on the CCBC:through representatives nominated for appointment through the Regional Transportation Planning Committees. Because the CCTA is charged with the coordination of countywide transportation programs and policies it is felt that having CCBC appointments be made through the CCTA will better foster countywide bicycle transportation development by integrating bicycle transportation with the other transportation modes under their purview. This raises the profile of bicyclingwith the 10 CCTA and broadens opportunities to provide for bicycle transportation by increasing CCTA involvement in bicycling issues. Since the BCS is represented through the RTPCs no loss of status is expected to occur by having appointments to the CCBC made through the CCTA instead of from the BOS directly. 8. ti�3�i r�rwyry{nmmitt -The CCBC will form liaisons with municipal bicycle advisory committees and assist in forming new 1VMACs. 9. CC =rdimdan-The CCBC will request that they serve as the official bicycle transportation advisory committee to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. 10. Catty nient Meed=.Dmes-In recognition of the importance of citizen involvement in this committee, CCBC meetings should be scheduled at times conducive for citizen participation(i.e. outside of normal business hours). 11. AWed Con titrr =-The CCBC structure should not preclude participation from the pedestrian and disabled communities in the future. 11 The Board of Supervisors Contra 651 Pine �x,06 Cost � (510)33&1900 Martinez,Casa 04W3-tn3 County ,�e. ►,�csw+cc A .Z September 22, 1998 W. Lawrence D. Dahms, Executive Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607 Dear Mr. Dahms: I am writing to you on behalf o€the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to comment on the Draft 1998 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Board members have followed the development of the RTP through our representation on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission(MTC), the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, and varioustransportation planning committees that conduct multi-jurisdictional cooperative transportation planning in Contra Costa. The comments of the Board of Supervisors center on the State Route 4 Bypass and Vasco Road, two important transportation facilities that connect Contra Costa to other counties. The Board supports including the State Route 4 Bypass as a four-lane expressway in the Track 1 category of the 1998 RTP. This request is consistent with the adopted General Plans of Antioch, Brentwood, and Contra Costa County and with the request made by our congestion management agency, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. The 1996 RTP already includes the first phases of the Bypass as a locally-funded two-lane expressway from State Route 160 to Walnut Boulevard. More recent forecasts of state and federal transportation revenues provide an opportunity for further investment in this corridor. We request that MTC carefully consider the proposal of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority to include the State Route 4 Bypass as a four-lane expressway. This proposal is described in their September 16, 1998 comments to you on the Draft. 1998 RTP, and provides a feasible way to include the Bypass as a four-lane facility in the Track 1 category of the 1998 RTP while responsibly adhering to the financial constraints that MTC must work within. The Board is also concerned about the lack of coordination for planning essential safety improvements to Vasco Road in Alameda County. The Draft 1998 RTP includes$5.8 million in Track 1 revenues for this project, but the necessary match is not shown for Alameda County. Mr. Dahms September 22, 1998 Page Two Regional travel forecasts indicate that travel demand on this corridor will grow significantly as workers in the Tri-Valley and Silicon Valley seek affordable housing in eastern Contra Costa. The proposed project would not increase the capacity of Vasco Road, but would instead address a problem that can only get worse as traffic increases. We support the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's request for MTC's assistance in developing a workable solution to the operational and safety problems on Vasco Road that can be included in the 1998 RTP. The Board of Supervisors would like to thank the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the opportunity to review and comment on the 1998 RTP. Sincerely yours, V4g A*,q� AM 'Rogers, Chair Cc: Supervisor DeSaulnier, MTC Sharon Brown, MTC Barbara Guise, CCTA Supervisor Canciamilla, TRANSPLAN Committee