The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 10071986 - X.4 Xy TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: SUPERVISORS SUNNE MC PEAK AND ROBERT SCHRODER, CO-CHAIRS I-680/24 TASK FORCE COMMITTEE DATE: OCTOBER 7, 1986 SUBJECT: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMENTS ON THE CALTRANS DRAFT I-680/24 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Specific Request(s) or Recommendation(s) & Background & Justification RECOMMENDATION Send the comments recommended by the I-680/24 Task Force and County staff to the California Department of Transportation as the official Contra Costa County position. The following comments are recommended by the Task Force and by County staff: Task Force Comments: 1. The project is essential and needed, since traffic congestion is getting worse every day. 2. The proposed project by Caltrans will correct one of the worst problems , in Contra Costa County's transportation system. 3. The impacts on the environment which will occur from the proposed project should .be mitigated to the fullest reasonable extent. 4. Care should be taken to insure that the final design will minimize the noise impacts that arise from freeway traffic on the residential and business concerns, as well as softening the impact of those soundwalls. 5. The portion of I-680 adjacent to the Sherman Acres Homeowners Association properties should be reviewed and the preferred alternative(s) presented to Caltrans at . the September 30,1986 Task Force meeting should be analyzed and commented upon as to their feasibility in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. 6. The proposed encroachment of the East Bay Municipal Utility District right-of-way under some of the alternatives proposed by the Sherman Acres Homeowners Association .should be investigated to see if EBMUD is willing to allow the encroachment to occur in this area. Continued on attachment: X Yes Signature: _ Recommendation of County Administrator _ Recommendation of Board Committee Approve Other: Signature(s): ` Action of Board on: 0-e2—L 7 /� w Approved as Recommended ✓ Other The Board approved the comments recommended by the Task Force and County Staff and authorized submission of the comments to CALTRANS as the official County position. Vote of Supervisors I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN Unanimous (Absent ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE Ayes: Noes: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN. Absent: Abstain: Attested , Orig.Div. : CDD T/P (boOct7.t10) PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS cc: Community Development AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Public Works . County Administrator By DEPUTY LE 7. The actual distances and measurements for the residential lots, the freeway right of way, and the EBMUD right of way and the aqueduct pipes' locations need to be determined and be resolved to eliminate the confusion that has arisen over the measurements provided by Caltrans and by the Sherman Acres Homeowners Association. 8. The right hand turn lane at Treat and North Main Street which leads onto I-680 southbound should be analyzed for its feasibility as a two lane on-ramp rather than a one lane on-ramp. Community Development and Public Works Comments: Draft EIS 1. Page 21: An alternative design designating a new lane for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) use with delineation and signage does have merit. Experience in California on the Artesia and Newport Freeways and the Santa Clara County expressways demonstrates the operational feasibility of this alternative without the "minimum" 12 foot buffer zone between the HOV lane and the mixed flow lanes. Maximum access to the HOV lane is provided to serve the large portion of trips entering and leaving the freeway within the project limits. This alternative requires additional enforcement efforts to discourage peak hour used by single occupant vehicles, but such expenditures would be considerably lower than the extra expense to construct a separate HOV facility. Consideration of a low cost HOV lane alternative would be consistent with the County's efforts to promote the use of transportation system management (TSM) strategies that will limit traffic growth. Contra Costa County recently adopted a TSM ordinance for the Pleasant Hill BART station area to reduce the percentage of commuters in single occupant vehicles. The provision of HOV lanes are the most effective TSM measures available because of the travel time advantage they offer. An HOV lane would also complement longer range improvements such as freeway ramp metering. The high percentage of traffic entering the freeway within the project limits will be a major source of congestion. Freeway ramp metering eventually will be needed to control these sources of traffic and limit delay on the freeway. HOV bypass lanes at the metered on ramps combined with an HOV freeway lane would offer substantial peak hour time savings. Draft EIS 2. Page 29: Discussion is needed regarding the County's Transportation System Management (TSM) ordinance for the Pleasant Hill BART station area and the project's compatibility with this ordinance. 3. General: The partial cloverleaf at Olympic Boulevard and the I-680 is the better alternative of the two proposed because it would handle traffic more efficiently. For this reason, staff supports this alternative over the diamond interchange proposal. 4. General: In order to keep traffic from using the local transportation system as an alternate to the current freeway while it is being recon- structed, Caltrans should provide detour signage to ensure that the motoring public does not use local streets as a substitute. Also, consideration should be given to keeping the new interchanges that are constructed closed after they are complete until the entire project is completed in that area to prevent freeway traffic form using the local system as an alternate route. 5. General: Affected residents and business concerns should be contacted to help them deal with the construction of the revised interchange and intersection improvements. Where the proposed project will cause the affected residents or business to be relocated, it is important that they be contacted early in the process so that they are aware of their options. • FINANCIAL IMPACT No .direct financial impact on the County's operations. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND: Under the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) , an Environmental Impact Statement is required on any action proposed by an agency using Federal funds that may have significant impact on the environment. The reconstruction of the I-680/24 Interchange and Freeway Improvements Draft Environmental Impact Statement and project development activities have been followed closely by the Board of Supervisors. In fact, because the process has slipped behind schedule in the last few years, the Board established a special subcommittee of the Board to monitor and assist where necessary to ensure that the process was accelerated and brought back onto schedule. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement is the next step in leading to the actual reconstruction of the freeway interchange and the freeway improvements. This is the Board of Supervisors' opportunity to ensure that concerns regarding the preferred alternative and the impacts associated with the project are addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement and that the appropriate mitigation measures are implemented. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the County does not comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, .the concerns of the County and its citizens will not be formally addressed in the final EIS. boOct7.t10 I