HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 12042014 - TWIC Agenda Pkt
TRANSPORTATION, WATER &
INFRASTRUCTURE
COMMITTEE
December 4, 2014
* 2:00 P.M. *
651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez
* Please note change in time *
Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, Chair
Supervisor Candace Andersen, Vice Chair
Agenda
Items:
Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference
of the Committee
1.Introduction
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on
this agenda. Speakers may be limited to three minutes.
3.Administrative Items. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and
Development)
4. REVIEW record of meeting for the October 9, 2014 Transportation, Water and
Infrastructure Committee meeting. This record was prepared pursuant to the Better
Government Ordinance 95-6, Article 25-205(d) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance
Code. Any handouts or printed copies of testimony distributed at the meeting will be
attached to this meeting record. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and
Development).
5. ACCEPT Report from the State Fire Marshal regarding the review of Kinder
Morgan’s Integrity Management Program. (Carrie Ricci, Department of Public
Works).
6. CONSIDER Report on the status of implementing a taxicab permitting process in
unincorporated Contra Costa County. (Tim Ewell, County Administrator’s Office).
7. CONSIDER Report on Local, State, and Federal Transportation Related
Legislative Issues and take ACTION as appropriate. (John Cunningham,
Department of Conservation and Development).
8. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to submit, on behalf of the County,
grant applications for the Transportation Development Act (TDA) 2015/2016
funding cycle. (Angela Villar, Department of Public Works).
9. RECEIVE Report on PG&E Coordination with Cities and County for Street
Light Maintenance. (Susan Cohen, Department of Public Works).
10. RECEIVE the 2014 Integrated Pest Management Annual Report, and take
ACTION as appropriate. The IPM Coordinator will present the report on the
County's IPM program. (Tanya Drlik, IPM Coordinator).
11.The date and time for the next meeting will be announced.
12.Adjourn
The Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) will provide reasonable
accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend TWIC meetings. Contact the staff
person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and
distributed by the County to a majority of members of the TWIC less than 72 hours prior to that
meeting are available for public inspection at the County Department of Conservation and
Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez during normal business hours.
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day
prior to the published meeting time.
For Additional Information Contact:
John Cunningham, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 674-7833
john.cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us
Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms (in alphabetical order): Contra Costa County
has a policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in meetings of its
Board of Supervisors and Committees. Following is a list of commonly used abbreviations that may appear in
presentations and written materials at meetings of the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee:
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ACA Assembly Constitutional Amendment
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
AOB Area of Benefit
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District
BATA Bay Area Toll Authority
BCDC Bay Conservation & Development Commission
BDCP Bay-Delta Conservation Plan
BGO Better Government Ordinance (Contra Costa County)
BOS Board of Supervisors
CALTRANS California Department of Transportation
CalWIN California Works Information Network
CalWORKS California Work Opportunity and Responsibility
to Kids
CAER Community Awareness Emergency Response
CAO County Administrative Officer or Office
CCTA Contra Costa Transportation Authority
CCWD Contra Costa Water District
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFS Cubic Feet per Second (of water)
CPI Consumer Price Index
CSA County Service Area
CSAC California State Association of Counties
CTC California Transportation Commission
DCC Delta Counties Coalition
DCD Contra Costa County Dept. of Conservation & Development
DPC Delta Protection Commission
DSC Delta Stewardship Council
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
EIR Environmental Impact Report (a state requirement)
EIS Environmental Impact Statement (a federal requirement)
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FTE Full Time Equivalent
FY Fiscal Year
GHAD Geologic Hazard Abatement District
GIS Geographic Information System
HBRR Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation
HOT High-Occupancy/Toll
HOV High-Occupancy-Vehicle
HSD Contra Costa County Health Services Department
HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development
IPM Integrated Pest Management
ISO Industrial Safety Ordinance
JPA/JEPA Joint (Exercise of) Powers Authority or Agreement
Lamorinda Lafayette-Moraga-Orinda Area
LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission
LCC League of California Cities
LTMS Long-Term Management Strategy
MAC Municipal Advisory Council
MAF Million Acre Feet (of water)
MBE Minority Business Enterprise
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
MOE Maintenance of Effort
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
NACo National Association of Counties
NEPA National Environmental Protection Act
OES-EOC Office of Emergency Services-Emergency
Operations Center
PDA Priority Development Area
PWD Contra Costa County Public Works Department
RCRC Regional Council of Rural Counties
RDA Redevelopment Agency or Area
RFI Request For Information
RFP Request For Proposals
RFQ Request For Qualifications
SB Senate Bill
SBE Small Business Enterprise
SR2S Safe Routes to Schools
STIP State Transportation Improvement Program
SWAT Southwest Area Transportation Committee
TRANSPAC Transportation Partnership & Cooperation (Central)
TRANSPLAN Transportation Planning Committee (East County)
TWIC Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
WBE Women-Owned Business Enterprise
WCCTAC West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory
Committee
WETA Water Emergency Transportation Authority
WRDA Water Resources Development Act
TRANSPORTATION, WATER &
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 4.
Meeting Date:12/04/2014
Subject:REVIEW record of meeting for the October 9, 2014 Transportation,
Water and Infrastructure Committee meeting.
Submitted For: John Kopchik, Interim Director, Conservation & Development
Department
Department:Conservation & Development
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: N/A
Presenter: John Cunningham, DCD Contact: John Cunningham
(925)674-7833
Referral History:
This record was prepared pursuant to the Better Government Ordinance 95-6, Article 25-205(d) of
the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code.
Referral Update:
Any handouts or printed copies of testimony distributed at the meeting will be attached to this
meeting record.
Links to the agenda and minutes will be available at the TWI Committee web page:
www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/twic
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Staff recommends approval of the attached Record of Action for the October 9, 2014 Committee
meeting with any necessary corrections.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
N/A
Attachments
10-9-14 TWIC Sign In Sheet.pdf
10-9-14 TWIC Handouts & Testimony
10-9-14 TWIC Meeting Record
Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee Meeting
October 9, 2014
SIGN-IN SHEET
Signing in is voluntary. You may attend this meeting without signing in. (If front is filled, please use back.)
Name Representing Phone
.
S \A5 em ;J:, VI f(s J, ffS[_ 2f3 L/601
' 'ffSC She-lot", t>Jk;. s ~ i ~-l"-'~ 1 J/-ljrf:g-
•. SiJ. £<.14 __/CD ~--€.v] _; CCC 0 vJ 3/~-..1./k>c I . .
d VL tv_ ~re-t ~!'\ {CC vcrJ ;; l3 -.7--:A.o I
dv . .e_ \(.LL-('_ { c ?W 31s~"21oi
\d~ ('( .-( (l LtA.( {''L c pW ~~3-21e::>O
CLcz_ ~tc;<( ___e ~~ c.cc ·-p lJ\1 ;1 ~~2::z9v
n. t._J
CcJt{'. ~its<ftdA~uxcy UL !M t",(kJut~ Jtlv --2ft~ <f;·?s
v f
\\1\\()\t\ t~ WI\\~ VG -r£ IL\ 1&-J lQS-oHLJ
lri \_ \ l Kc~'-1 ---
l~rvl :s_;c~avts·d ~~Lt
~ ' \ -~ 1~ cr>LM S1'i'L fi e.JPL"-0 1~6-tnc+
~ ~ ' th• I ~ QiAU 1":7t> r ~..r4f\ ~':2,t-nc. +-.J
~~\:x-n-I
l )\)c.__ ~,~~ ,!.tdU
---
..
Public Comment to TWIG October 9, 2014
Matt Valdin, M.S.
Environmental Consultant, Danville
Read by Susan JunFish, Director of Programs, Parents for a Safer Environment
Dear Members of the Committee:
Born and raised in the East Bay Area, protecting and monitoring the environment
where I grew up always has been a passion of mine, which is why I felt
compelled to write a statement in absence. To this end, reducing pesticide usage
is a critical issue facing us, especially as each and every year scientists discover
more negative effects of exposure to adults, children, and the natural
environment.
I wish to refer you to a graph provided to me by PfSE in March, showing a 9 year
trend of rodenticide usage by the County's Agriculture Department (AG), from
2004 to 2013. Upon placing a trend line on the rodenticide usage over the 9-year
period, I discovered a 9% increase in usage of diphacinone-0.01% and a near
constant amount of diphacinone-0.005% usage over the same time. This
indicates that rodenticide usage appears to not be reducing the pest population,
otherwise one would see a reduction in usage, not an increase. This graph
indicates a failure of long-term success using diphacinone as a means of
reducing the pest population.
One needs to be cautious about drawing any conclusion about a reduction trend
from the FY 13-14 data point since this is a significant outlier. Without an
explanation about a change in the system or protocol on how pests are
controlled, it is likely that the trend may go back up. The questions I would ask
are:
• What processes did the County change that enabled it to reduce the
rodenticide usage by about-3-fold from earlier years?
• How has the control of pests changed, if any, from reducing rodenticide
usage by -3-fold?
• Do other agencies using traps or other methods find a reduction in the
pests over a decade or are they using more traps in parallel to our County
requiring more rodenticides over the past decade?
It has been made aware to me that beginning in 2013, PfSE emphasized
concerns over the rodenticide usage by Contra Costa County so could this dip in
usage be to temporarily mollify community concerns? My recommendation is to
consider looking at the rodenticide usage over the longest period of time for
which data is available and not just the last 6 years. If systems have not
changed significantly, you will soon see the usage creeping up again in order to
maintain pest control.
I hope to see the County strive towards a long-term, successful solution.
Susan JunFish public comment:
We are very pleased to see a 300% decrease in the usage of rodenticide from FY
2012-2013 to the most recent. However it is still14,301 pounds more bait poisoned
with diphacione applied than all Marin, San Francisco, and Santa Clara counties
combined that do not use any rodenticides at all in open space. Please consider
contracting with an expert trapper to do a pilot trial so that we can more fairly
assess efficacy and costs per Shirley's public comment.
Thank you.
>>HUt:>'--•t"'i:>
4
3.5
25
VI ..,
c
"' 2 0
0..
LS
0.5
c
20'J4-2G05
·0.5
1 •• + 1
Contra Costa County Agriculture Department
Total Active Ingredients of Diphacinone
Trend from FY 04-05 to FY 12-13
.... 7/. /JilcteaSC. o.P )1)/tcinrrhe an/-r?()4J<,(.,nf-
p;dtnir0?k ov~r 'l prfe~<>L.
3.37
2.005-201)5 l:Y'<k<W07 2007-1008 2008-2009 :woo~2010 2.010-201:
Diphacinone Active Ingredient
c::::::JDipbacmou-e Act1ve Ingredient
0. 00:' ~ <:. Acti~·e ingredients
~Diphacinon~ 0.01 ~~A-cti;·e
lngnodienu
--I.mear {Diphacinone ..\.clive
lngti'<hent 0.00:t«c .J.i.:tive
Ingr~_Ql~q}
1011-2G.:.2 2012-2013
\
Rodenticide Use by County Operations
Rodenticides--Pounds of Active Ingredient. Used by
Fiscal Year
DEPARTMENT FY 00-01 FY 04-05 , FY 07-08 FY 08-09
Public Works I 0.00 0.00 i o.oo I 0.00
PW Special Dist. I no data no data I no data I 10.79
Agriculture I 1.62 2.57 i 2.61 I 2.97 '
PW Grounds 0 00 0 00 0.00' 0.00 i
~W Facilities no data no data 0.09 o.o6 I
TOTAL 1.62 2.57 2.70 13.82 I
Lbs of Diphacinone Bait used by the Agriculture Department in their
Ground Squirrel Management Program in Contra Costa County
FY 09-10
0.00
9.20
2.81
0.00
0.02
12 03
FY 11-12 FY 12-13
Lbs of Diphacinone 0.005% bait 4,570 1,835
Lbs of Diphacinone 0.01% bait 31,045 27,487
TOTALS 35,615 29,322 ---
. FY 10-
11
0.00
1247
3.37
0.00
0.00
15.84
FY 13-14
Lbs of Anticoagulant Bait used by the Contra Costa County Special Districts' Contractor
L-----I FY 11-12 FY12-13 FY 13-1£ ____
I Diphacinone and ! 66.8 190.4 88.0
i Chlorophacinone bait
FY 11-FY 12-FY 13-
12 13 14
0.00 0.00 0.00
6.73 7.14 1.59
4.28 2.84 1.38
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0 00 0.0()_
11.01 9.98 2.97 ·-----
1,335
13,056
14,391
-x· Contra Costa County
Trash Red~ction Plan
Update
October 9, 2014
Cece Sellgren
County Watershed Program
r.RE'view ac.:hfevement of 40X trash
reductton
"Review costs to implement trash
reductiOn str·ategies
*Revtew efforts to finalize Long Term
Trash Reductton Plan
*Dtscuss next steps
*Pr~s~ptation Outline
""How we d1d Tt...
27.4 "' through ,,,..land clean ups
U>ol 1'><:1 .vith t<obrl> T•ch
6 8 i· thT!IUgh fn stream-clean-ups
• Homel.e!!: ~"'-'-teiTlPnt in Flood Cont.ol Dist••ct
:;tro:•flmfc~.fititfe!ii:
~.1 "< thrrugh full trash capture devices
2 ).( tor outreach and education efforts
-:~count, Achieves 42%
Trash Reduction~
10/9/2014
1
J
!
"
oCountywlde Tr.ash Reductton Effortl
•Aim~~~,BI•Jr~.vk,~r!d
Dl'llblo(ADB!
• &.yPIMnt(E!oPTI
• a ~bnnte (~BI
• UIWnCOili'OI•~d Menmo:.!
IMPf')
• North lbchm;;ntl !NRM)
• Rodeo IM>DI
•~lbcN.»nnf ,....., .........
*FY 13-14 Tr?sh
Reduction Relatjv~
Contrfbutfons by
*Percent Trash Reduction
wtthin each Community
I. I II.
-x-Adopt -a -Road
FY 13-14 Adopt-a-Road Totals
ROUP NAME loCATION ...
Yo leChurch
' ...
b .... .... ' -...
,_ ...
~ftwood Roed,l!llon Road, F"rt Ch1clfO,HoAIY lll1choi:1KOMI,
•<• ,_,., .. ...... ... ,_._ .. ,,.
iotr-P,.Roo I.OwPolot , ...................
Total Gallons Removed: 13,500
= 450 thirty gallon bags
10/9/2014
2
'r ~-=~=J .. _-._. .. . _,_
_,""" ... -,.
10/9/2014
*Bay Pofnt
*NQrth Richm ond
*R" h d p I +· .. 1c .mon ocK e s
3
'H."'r" .... , ... I ~CW.·J)J
KloiC'J!'II-1
' •
*Cost 9.f on-land Clean-up
for 6 month period
(3-14 to 9-14)
'~·Annual c:osts of on-lit fl d
dea.n-up if we m(!int --in
l"" i er r.f I P freq oncy w· . ~c~~;-u . u~ o'M'-
Comrnunlt fl of O.on-uas oet veat Amount
~Point 1 Is 91.ooooo
l'llorth R1chmonC: 21; I$ 103 000.00
Rod.IO 1 Is os ooo .oo
R.d.mand IUnotc.oroomedl 1 olODDD.OO
~ .. rrw.d• 3 S 101~ UOO.OO
tafftlme S 15 000.00
Annual Cost $ 437,000.00
10/9/2014
4
li-Met with Municipal Advisory Councils
*Bay Point June 3, 2014
''El Sobrante July 9, 2014
4 Rodeo July 24,2014
''North Rtchmond August 13, 2014
"Knightsen August 26 , 2014
*Pacheco September 10, 2014
;<-Crockett September 11, 2014
*Outreach to
t9mmunities
"MACs with which I st1U need to meet
"'Alamo MAC
·~Bethel Island Municipallmprow:lment
D1strict
*Byron MAC
*Diablo Community Semces Dtstrict
(CSD)
*Discovery Bay CSD
*Kensington CSD *Outreach to
Communit;es (con't)
"PWD
County Watershed Ptogram
Mamtenance Division
"DCD
~hd Waste Division
Butldmg lnspectton Division
'Health Services -Environmental Health DIVISIOn
•shenff Department-Quality of Life Pohce Units
·*coordination between
County Depqrtm ents
10/9/2014
5
Ru•~' II!' Urban <\r~a'
P.lllal Roads
~tate ·Wide Tf&sh .t.m.,ndmE'nts
Sh1f11r.r iu:nn c;nldld S.::MC€'1~ to "scli SeiYlC"e'· to "'l"t.l need ((n•
serva(P.'"1
Challenges of htnng local youth
Mo1e Tf&sh Capture Devices?
No1tt, R1chmund
l<odl't•
• Dot•blo! Street Sweeping In high/moderate Commerdal Zone-.
• Meamngful Cummunity Outreach
• Expaud 1ntc Pacheco 1!: Crockett this yea1
*Important lssi,Jes to
Address
{}Questions???
10/9/2014
6
D R A F T
TRANSPORTATION, WATER &
INFRASTRUCTURE
COMMITTEE
October 9, 2014
10:30 A.M.
651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez
Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, Chair
Supervisor Candace Andersen, Vice Chair
Present: Mary N. Piepho, Chair
Candace Andersen, Vice Chair
Staff Present:John Cunningham, TWIC Staff, Principal Planner
Attendees: Cece Sellgren, Public Works
Jill Ray, District 3
Joe Yee, Public Works
Julie Bueren, Public Works
Mark Watts (California Strategies & Advocacy, LLC)
Michele Ward, PG&E
Robert Sarmiento, Conservation and Development
Shirley Shelangoski, Parents for a Safer Env.
Susan Cohen, Public Works
Susan JunFish, Parents for a Safer Environment
Warren Lai, Public Works
1.Introductions
See the attached sign-in sheet and "Attendees" section above.
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on
this agenda. Speakers may be limited to three minutes.
Susan JunFish (Parents for a Safer Environment) read a letter (attached) from Matt
Valdin (M.S. Environmental Consultant) regarding pesticide use trends and provided
an handout on the same.
Shirley Shelangoski (Parents for a Safer Environment) provided comment regarding
pesticide use and provided written comments (attached).
The Committee directed staff to route the comments and written material to the
County Agricultural Commissioner and Integrated Pest Management Coordinator
who are to prepare a response to TWIC with a copy to the Parents for a Safer
Environment representatives.
3.Administrative Items. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and
Development)
No administrative items were discussed.
4.Staff recommends approval of the attached Record of Action for the August 7, 2014
Committee meeting with any necessary corrections.
The Record of Action for the August 7, 2014 Transportation, Water, and
Infrastructure Committee meeting was approved unanimously.
5.The County Stormwater Manager recommends:
Continue to reduce trash rates in the five trash-challenged communities by
maintaining on-land cleanups using a contractor.
Reevaluate whether rural communities and rural roads should be included in the
NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) trash reduction
requirements.
Transition from using a contractor to using local labor forces to conduct on-land
cleanups, especially in residential neighborhoods. Research alternative sources of
labor for cleanups on County roads.
Continue to evaluate the feasibility of installing larger trash capture devices in
trash-challenged communities for which drainage inlet trash capture devices are
not feasible.
Implement a coordinated program to ensure every residence, apartment complex,
and business has the right size and frequency of garbage service to reduce trash bin
overfill.
Double the frequency of street sweeping in high and moderate trash rate
commercial areas.
Expand the number of communities where trash reduction efforts are implemented
— Pacheco and Crockett are next likely communities.
Expand the “Adopt-A-Road” program and plan for transition of key staff, if
needed.
The Committee received the report, approved staff recommendations, and further
directed staff to secure time for a Short Discussion item at the full Board of
Supervisors, work with CCTV to record and rebroadcast the presentation, and
continue to consult with other agencies to identify options for volunteer/community
service assistance.
6.RECEIVE report regarding the Replacement of High Pressure Sodium Vapor Street
6.RECEIVE report regarding the Replacement of High Pressure Sodium Vapor Street
Lights with Light Emitting Diode (LED) Energy Efficient Lights and take action as
appropriate.
The Committee received the report and authorized staff to bring the request for
approximately $400,000 in CSA L-100 funds for the installation of LED lights by
PG&E to the full Board of Supervisors.
7.CONSIDER Report on Local, State, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative
Issues and take ACTION as appropriate including CONSIDERATION of specific
recommendations in the report above.
The Committee received the report and directed staff to coordinate with the new
Agricultural Commissioner on school siting issues, and with CCTA staff on the
upcoming visit from our federal legislative advocate.
8.RECEIVE update on Pedestrian-Rail Safety issues and DIRECT staff as appropriate.
The Committee received the report and directed staff to pursue the Operation
Lifesaver Grant in 2016, continue to pursue other grants including technology and
suicide prevention programs, coordinate with CCTV to broadcast outreach, and
approach refineries for assistance with funding (nexus = increase in rail transport).
9.Adjourn to the next scheduled TWIC meeting on November 6, 2014.
For Additional Information Contact: John Cunningham, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 674-7833
john.cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us
TRANSPORTATION, WATER &
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 5.
Meeting Date:12/04/2014
Subject:ACCEPT report from the State Fire Marshal regarding the review of Kinder
Morgan’s Integrity Management Program
Submitted For: Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Department:Public Works
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: N/A
Presenter: Carrie Ricci, Department of Public
Works
Contact: Carrie Ricci
(925)313-2235
Referral History:
At the February 12, 2014, Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee Meeting, the
Committee received a report regarding Kinder Morgan’s Integrity Management Program (IMP)
and recommended forwarding the report to the Board of Supervisors for consideration and
approval to send a letter to the Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM) requesting a review of
Kinder Morgan’s IMP for all pipelines in Contra Costa County.
On March 11, 2014, the Board of Supervisors approved sending the letter to OSFM requesting a
review of Kinder Morgan’s IMP for their pipelines in Contra Costa County and to share the
results of the analysis with the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee.
Referral Update:
On May 14, 2014, the County received the enclosed response from OSFM. Staff from the OSFM
will attend the December 4, 2014 Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee Meeting to
present a summary of findings from their review of Kinder Morgan’s Integrity Management
Program.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Receive report from the Office of the State Fire Marshal regarding their recent review of Kinder
Morgan’s Integrity Management Program.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments
Response from OSFM
Report 2014
OSFM Pipeline Safety Inspection of Kinder Morgan‘s Integrity Management Program
December 4, 2014 – Martinez, CA
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee Meeting
•Staffing and Office Locations
•OSFM Regulated Pipelines and Facilities
•OSFM Inspection Responsibilities
•SFM Authority and Federal Partner
•Integrity Management Program – what is it?
•Program Elements
•Kinder Morgan Intrastate Integrity Management
Program Inspection
•Concluding Remarks
OSFM Pipeline Safety – Overview
•Inspection Staffing:
•Division Chief
•1 Supervising Pipeline Safety Engineer (1 vacancy)
•4 Pipeline Safety Engineers (6 vacancies)
•2 Retired Annuitants (1/2 time)
•Office Locations:
•Sacramento
•Bakersfield
•Lakewood (LA area)
OSFM Pipeline Safety – Staffing
OSFM Pipeline Safety – Jurisdictional Pipelines/Facilities
•Refined product pipelines from
refineries to marketing terminals
and airports
•Highly Volatile Liquid
Pipelines
•Crude oil pipelines from onshore and offshore
production fields to refineries
•Breakout Tanks
•The State Fire Marshal is certified by DOT/PHMSA to conduct
inspection and enforcement of federal pipeline safety
regulations on intrastate pipelines in California.
•Effective January 1, 2013, the inspection of the interstate
pipelines in California was turned back to the federal Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).
•The decision to end California’s interstate agent agreement
was necessitated by the shortage of inspectors and the need to
focus resources on the remaining 4,500 miles of intrastate
pipelines.
OSFM Pipeline Safety – Federal/State Partnership
Intrastate and Interstate
OSFM Pipeline Safety – Jurisdictional Pipelines in Statewide
•4500 miles of intrastate
pipeline
•344 Pump Stations and Tank
farms
•744 Breakout Tanks
•52 pipeline operators
Intrastate
OSFM Pipeline Safety – Pipelines in Contra Costa County
All Intrastate and Interstate Pipelines
Intrastate Hazardous Liquid
Pipeline Operators –
(Contra Costa County Only)
•Total operators: 9
Intrastate Pipeline Mileage –
(Contra Costa County Only)
•Total Miles: 993
•Kinder Morgan Miles: 419
There are 9 Kinder Morgan Intrastate
pipelines in Contra Costa County. Each of
these lines were included in this IMP
inspection plus two additional pipelines
that travel from Oakland to Brisbane.
Kinder Morgan Intrastate Pipelines
•Standard (Comprehensive)
•Construction
•Accident Investigations (Leaks)
•Integrity Management
•Program (Procedures)
•Field (Hydrostatic tests, ILI)
•Operator Qualification
•Program, Field
•Breakout Tank
•Drug and Alcohol
•Public Awareness
•Control Room Management
OSFM Pipeline Safety – Types of Inspections
OSFM utilizes a risk-based inspection approach based on
available resources.
•Train Derailments
•Encroachment Issues
•Safety Related Conditions
•Local Assistance
•Training
•Spill Drills
•Public Requests
•Media Request
OSFM Pipeline Safety – Additional Requirements
•Program started with the passage of the
Elder Pipeline Safety Act
•Requires Operators to pressure test
each Hazardous Liquid Pipeline every 5
years
•Independent Testing
Companies/Witnesses
•Test must be documented and sent to
OSFM
•Many Operators utilize high tech In-Line
Inspection (ILI) tools
•Testing and Repairs may be monitored
by OSFM
OSFM Pipeline Integrity Program – Hydrostatic Pressure Tests/ILI
Beginning in 1984, the California State Fire Marshal has
required all intrastate pipelines over 10 year of age to be
periodically hydrotested or internally inspected at intervals not
to exceed 5 years.
Ca. Govt. Code 51010-51019
GOALS: Improve pipeline safety through:
•accelerating the integrity assessment of pipelines in
High Consequence Areas,
•improving integrity management systems within
companies,
•improving the government's role in reviewing the
adequacy of integrity programs and plans, and
•providing increased public assurance in pipeline safety.
Beginning in 2001, DOT/PHMSA required all pipeline
operators to comply with the Liquid IM Rule. The Liquid IM
Rule specifies how pipeline operators must identify, prioritize,
assess, evaluate, repair and validate the integrity of hazardous
liquid pipelines that could, in the event of a leak or failure, affect
High Consequence Areas (HCAs) within the United States. HCAs
include: population areas; areas containing drinking water and
ecological resources that are unusually sensitive to
environmental damage; and commercially navigable waterways.
DOT/PHMSA Integrity Management Program – Elements (Protocols) 195.452 (f)
•A DOT-PHMSA Team Inspection of Kinder Morgan’s Integrity
Management Program was completed in June 2010.
•OSFM completed an Inspection of Kinder Morgan’s Integrity
Management Program in July 2014.
•Inspection Forms
•Protocols Reviewed
•Inspection Findings
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Overview
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – DOT/PHMSA IMP Elements (Protocols)
1.Identifying Segments that Could Impact HCAs
•High Population Areas and Other Populated Areas
•Commercially Navigable Waterways
•Unusually Sensitive Areas of Environment
•Drinking Water USA
•Ecological USA (see 195.6)
2.Baseline Assessment Plan
Completion Date
•February 18, 2003
•1 Year after the pipeline begins operation
DOT PHMSA reviewed Kinder Morgan’s Baseline Assessment Plan during the 2010
Integrity Management Program Inspection. There were no potential issues identified
in Protocol 2 (Baseline Assessment Plan) during the PHMSA 2010 inspection. Kinder
Morgan has not constructed any new INTRAstate pipelines in Contra Costa County or
identified any new High Consequence Areas since the 2010 DOT PHMSA Integrity
Management Inspection that would require a Baseline Assessment.
3.Integrity Assessment Results Review
4.Remedial Action - Making Mitigation and Repair
Decision Consequences Likelihood of Occurrence
Highest
Risk
Lowest
Risk
195.452 (f)
5.Risk Analysis - Integrating and
Analyzing Risk Information
6.Identifying Additional Preventive and
Mitigative Measures
7.Continual evaluation and assessment
of pipe integrity
8.Operator Measures Program
Performance Consequences Likelihood of Occurrence
Highest
Risk
Lowest
Risk
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – DOT/PHMSA IMP Elements (Protocols) 195.452 (f)
1.Direct Analysis
2.Indirect Analysis
3.Terrain Analysis
4.Direct Watershed
Analysis
5.Indirect Watershed
Analysis
6.Pool Fire Analysis
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Identify Segments that Could Impact an HCA
Kinder Morgan uses the PHMSA National Pipeline
Mapping System (NPMS) High Consequence Area
(HCA) dataset as a baseline for their HCA model. Their
HCA dataset is updated annually using input from
field Subject Matter Experts that document new
HCA's, changes in existing HCA's, or changes to the
system that may not have been captured during the
Management of Change (MOC) process. Their
contractor, American Innovations (AI), receives an
updated NPMS HCA layer from Kinder Morgan prior
to performing the HCA Impact identification. AI
performs the six types of analysis for Kinder Morgan
using a combination of its risk analysis software, Risk
Intelligence Platform (RIPL™), and its HCA analysis
software, Risk Consequence Analysis Tool (RiskCAT)
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Integrity Assessment Results Review The Kinder Morgan Analysis Profile specifies In-Line
Inspection Tool requirements (i.e. tool type, reporting
specifications, ILI vender personnel qualifications, etc.).
Kinder Morgan is notified by the ILI vender of all
Immediate Repair Conditions by phone, email, and
written. Kinder Morgan then determines for each
Immediate Repair Condition if the maximum operating
pressure of the line must be lowered, the line needs to be
shut down, or a safety related condition exists.
According to regulations, once an operator discovers a
condition the operator is required to determine if the
condition meets any of the rule’s special requirements for
scheduling remediation. The assessment records
reviewed during this IMP Inspection show that all repair
conditions (“immediate repair,” 60-day, 180-day, and
“other” conditions) had been discovered within 180 days
of running the ILI tool.
Kinder Morgan procedures
require that only qualified
individuals review and analyze
information generated from
integrity assessments. ILI
vender personnel evaluating
integrity assessment results will
be level II qualified per API
1163 and ASNT ILI-PQ-2005.
Kinder Morgan personnel
involved in the review and
evaluation of integrity
assessment results possess at
least, or work with someone
who has Bachelor of Science
Degree in an engineering
discipline or equivalent
experience.
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Remedial Actions (Repairs)
If KM is unable to meet the schedule for any
conditions which meet the definitions of Part 195.452
(h), then KM will provide notification to PHMSA
justifying the reason the schedule cannot be met and
that the change will not jeopardize public safety or
environmental protection.
The ILI Action Plans reviewed during this IMP
inspection show that each repair condition was
repaired or remediated within the required time.
Immediate Repair Conditions
•Immediate reduction of
pressure or shutdown
(within 5 business days of
discovery) until
appropriate repairs are
completed
60-Day Repair Conditions
•Scheduled for evaluation
and remediation within
60 days of discovery
180-Day Repair Condition
•Scheduled for evaluation
and remediation within
180 days of discovery.
Immediate Repair Conditions are provided to Kinder Morgan by
the ILI vendor in a verbal, written, or preliminary report. Kinder
Morgan will review the report and complete any actions required
within five working days of receiving the report (i.e. reduce
pressure to safe limits or shut down the pipeline) or the condition
will be considered a safety related condition that requires
reporting to PHMSA. If more than one anomaly site has been
identified as an immediate repair condition, Kinder Morgan will
prioritize the repair work based on the severity of the anomaly and
the proximity of HCA locations
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Risk Analysis
Kinder Morgan uses the Risk Intelligence Platform
(RIPL™) to spatially align the risk data (i.e. pipe data,
coatings, crossings, one-call records, geographic data,
assessment results, CIS data, CP readings, PIRR,
Foreign Line Crossing Reports, Subject Matter Expert
input, and more) into the KM PODS database.
Kinder Morgan calculates the Risk of Failure by
multiplying the weighted threat (Likelihood of Failure)
and consequence (Consequence of Failure) scores.
Kinder Morgan’s Likelihood of Failure categories
include; External Corrosion Threat, Internal Corrosion
Threat, Stress Corrosion Cracking, Manufacturing
Threat, Construction Threat, Equipment Threat, Third
Party Damage, Incorrect Operations, and Weather
Related Outside Force. Kinder Morgan’s Consequence
of Failure categories are Consequence to the Public
and Consequence to the Environment.
Kinder Morgan employs a Risk
Management Team to run the risk
database audit and perform
quality control analysis. The
Kinder Morgan Risk Management
Team includes the Risk Manager,
GIS PODS Database Team
(consisting of GIS Manager and 4
Pacific Region Gatekeepers), and
the KM Contactor American
Innovations (consisting of three
Risk Engineers and two GIS
Database Specialists).
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Additional Preventative and Mitigative Actions
Kinder Morgan completes a Pipeline System P&MM
Analysis Sheet for each pipeline system except those
pipeline segments that are found to have sufficient
P&MM’s and require no additional P&MM’s. The
justifications are submitted to the KM Risk Manager for
review and approval. A Pipeline System P&MM Analysis
Sheet was completed for all but one INTRAstate pipeline
in Contra Costa County.
Kinder Morgan did not complete a Pipeline System
P&MM Analysis Sheet on their LS74 (CSFM 0313)
pipeline. An In-Line Inspection was completed on this
line in 2012 with no integrity management conditions
identified and there were no newly identified “could
affect” high consequence area. Kinder Morgan stated
that they would perform the P&MM Analysis in 2017
after the next ILI assessment is complete.
The action items identified
for the pipelines in Contra
Costa County include sending
all Right-of-way (ROW)
inspectors to the 1-week
Kinder Morgan ROW college,
monitor wash outs and
unstable slopes, input
cathodic protection data
using Allegro units, drill with
local Emergency Responders,
continue to update
alignment sheets, and
increased aerial patrols
(weekly). Each of these
action items are on-going.
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Continual Evaluation of Pipeline Integrity
Kinder Morgan bases the periodic evaluation
and assessment intervals of their pipelines on
in-service failures, past and present integrity
assessment results, analysis of information
from other surveys and inspection, repairs and
P&MM implemented, risk factors, and risk
analysis. This is discussed by the risk team at
the end of the ILI Assessment. As a minimum
standard, KM reassesses each pipeline segment
that could affect an HCA at intervals not to
exceed 5 years from the previous assessment.
Variance from the 5-year assessment interval
are permitted only in circumstances where an
engineering basis for a variance is established
or the technology required is unavailable.
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Measure Program Performance
KM continually evaluates and revises their
Integrity Management Program Manual to
reflect new operating and industry
experience, include the conclusions drawn
from integrity management process results,
and incorporate the evolution of tools and
techniques as they become available.
KM utilizes lessons learned from audits and
accident investigations to make
improvements to their program. Findings
from integrity activities and risk reduction
activities (ex. install flow meter on other end
to have a mass balance, P&MM, relocation)
are also considered.
KM measures performance against other
operators in the industry (information is
obtained from regulatory agencies and
industry organizations)
Performance Measures and Goals:
•Reduce total volume of unintended releases
•Reduce total number of unintended release
•Document the percentage of integrity
management activities completed during the year
•Track & evaluate the effectiveness of KM's
outreach activities
•Internal audits of pipeline systems
•External audits of pipeline systems
•Operations events that have the potential to
adversely affect pipeline integrity.
•Demonstrate that the integrity management
program supports continuous risk reduction
activities with a focus on high risk items. As
assessments, repairs, and procedural or process
changes are made, operating risk for individual
segments and pipelines should be reduced.
•Demonstrate that the integrity management
program for pipeline stations and terminals
supports continuous risk reduction activities with a
focus on high risk items
•Narrate descriptions of pipeline system integrity,
including performance improvements
•Provide increasingly useful decision-making
assistance and information by suggesting effective
preventative and mitigative strategies
Kinder Morgan Integrity Management Program Inspection – Take Away
Kinder Morgan IMP Inspection – Conclusions
1.KM is dedicated to having qualified and experienced personnel developing,
managing, and implementing their IMP program. KM commits a considerable
volume of resources to maintain the integrity of their pipelines.
2.Significant leaks have dramatically dropped in the past 10 years. One reportable
release on a KM pipeline in CCC within the last 10 years (38 barrels from block
valve). Part of this success can be attributed to KM finding and repairing
anomalies in their lines before they develop into a release and a concerted effort
to reduce 3rd Party Damage.
3.KM incorporates information from each of their Business Units and field Subject
Matter Experts in the evaluation of their IM Program
4.KM continues to improve their IM Program. Including developing new
technologies and analysis for detecting anomalies, hiring additional ROW
personnel and developing new processes to limit 3rd party damage, developing
and mandating a line rider college, and providing public awareness presentations
to emergency responders and schools.
TRANSPORTATION, WATER &
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 6.
Meeting Date:12/04/2014
Subject:CONSIDER a report on the status of implementing a taxicab permitting
process in unincorporated Contra Costa County.
Submitted For: David Twa, County Administrator
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: 18
Referral Name: MONITOR issues of interest in the provision of general transportation
services, including but not limited to public transportation and taxicab services.
Presenter: Tim Ewell, Senior Deputy County
Administrator
Contact: Tim Ewell
(925)335-1036
Referral History:
On September 5, 2013, the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee received a staff
report regarding the status of a regulatory structure for taxicab permitting within the
unincorporated area, pursuant to Government Code § 53075.5. At that time, the Committee
directed staff to work with the County Administrator’s Office (CAO) to:
1. Obtain advice from County Counsel regarding the County’s potential risk and exposure for not
having a taxicab permitting ordinance or resolution pursuant to the California Code.
2. Coordinate with the Office of the Sheriff to identify resources and develop a budget for
codifying and administrating a taxicab permitting ordinance or resolution.
On June 5, 2014, the County Administrator’s Office returned to the Committee with a framework
for the implementation of a taxicab ordinance in unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County.
The implementation frame work, including roles of County departments, is summarized below:
TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR:
I. Issues general business license to taxi companies operating in the unincorporated area.
II. Notifies applicants of the need to acquire a taxicab permit in jurisdiction where business is
located.
SHERIFF'S OFFICE:
I. Issues Permits to new taxicab operators and businesses located in the County unincorporated
area.
a. Applicant provides valid business license to operate in the unincorporated area.
b. Sheriff facilitates referrals for the California Department of Justice Live Scan and drug testing
for permit applicants with businesses established in the unincorporated area, at cost of the
applicant.
c. Applicant provides proof of taxicab vehicle inspection conducted by private entity at time of
application for a permit, at cost of the applicant.
d. Sheriff to establish a fee for reviewing new applications and annual renewals as part of the
Taxicab ordinance.
II. Existing taxicab operators and businesses permitted in other jurisdictions within Contra Costa
County doing business in an unincorporated area.
a. Ordinance to allow a permit from any other jurisdiction within Contra Costa County to operate
a taxicab to be accepted with no further action required by Sheriff’s Office.
b. Business owner are still responsible for acquiring a business license to operate in the
unincorporated area from Treasurer Tax Collector.
Referral Update:
At the June 5, 2014 meeting, the Committee approved the implementation framework and
directed staff to work with County Counsel to draft the Ordinance for review by the Committee.
Shortly following the meeting, the Contra Costa County Police Chief’s Association discussed at a
regular meeting, the notion of a regional taxicab cooperative.
On October 23, 2014, the County Administrator’s Office and Sheriff’s Office met with the
Concord Police Chief and staff to explore options for implementing a regional taxicab cooperative
with the intention of reporting back to the Committee with options and requesting direction.
Since that time, the Contra Costa County Local Government Leadership Academy, sponsored by
the Contra Costa County Public Manager’s Association and local jurisdictions, received a
submission from the City of Walnut Creek (Attachment A) to explore, as a project for Academy
participants, the implementation of a regional taxicab permitting program. The project duration is
from January through July 2015.
In light of the developments since the June 5, 2014 TWIC meeting, staff is recommending that the
Committee table further discussion about implementing a taxicab permitting regime for the
unincorporated area until the results of the Academy project is complete and an analysis by
County and municipal stakeholders is completed to assess the viability of a regional approach.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
I. ACCEPT a report on the status of implementing a taxicab permitting process in unincorporated
Contra Costa County.
II. PROVIDE feedback to staff as to how to move forward.
Attachments
Attachment A
TRANSPORTATION, WATER &
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 7.
Meeting Date:12/04/2014
Subject:CONSIDER Report on Local, State, and Federal Transportation Related
Legislative Issues and take ACTION as appropriate.
Submitted For: John Kopchik, Interim Director, Conservation & Development
Department
Department:Conservation & Development
Referral No.: 1
Referral Name: REVIEW legislative matters on transportation, water, and infrastructure.
Presenter: John Cunningham, DCD Contact: John Cunningham, (925)
674-7833
Referral History:
This is a standing item on the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee referral list
and meeting agenda.
Referral Update:
In developing transportation related legislative issues and proposals to bring forward for
consideration by TWIC, staff receives input from the Board of Supervisors, references the
County's adopted Legislative Platforms, coordinates with our legislative advocates, partner
agencies and organizations, and consults with the Committee itself.
At this time, staff is highlighting the items and recommendations below for the Committee's
consideration. This report includes three sections, 1) LOCAL, 2) STATE, and 3) FEDERAL:
1) LOCAL
A) The 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP) Update & Planning for Possible 2016
Ballot Measure is a standing item for the foreseeable future. Information from the prior months
report that continues to be relevant will be in italics, as follows:
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) is in the process of developing the 2014
Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP) which will be finalized at the end of 2014.
Please note that the CTP schedule has shifted, and adoption is estimated to be in early 2015.
(See attached: CTP_Schedule_2014/11/19.pdf).
The planning process is expected to produce a financially unconstrained project/program list of
approximately $5B. This list will ultimately be narrowed down to approximately $2.5B. At that
point, a more detailed discussion regarding revenue options to pay for the proposed programs
and projects will take place. The level of engagement of the County and the Board of Supervisors
will vary depending on what funding option, if any, is pursued.
4/16/14 CCTA Board Meeting: Staff reported that work has begun in developing a budget and
scope for a possible 2016 sales tax measure. Also discussed was: 1) the development of a
governance structure (both internal and external) to oversee the process, and 2) whether or not
modification of the existing ordinance or an entirely new ordinance would be more appropriate.
8/12/14 Board of Supervisors Meeting: Presentation by CCTA staff on the CTP Update and
Polling Results.
9/23/14 Board of Supervisors Meeting: Discussion on Draft letter to CCTA on the CTP Update.
This agenda item and discussion, in combination with outreach to each Supervisory District,
resulted in a comment letter on the CTP being transmitted to CCTA, (see attached: BOS to CCTA
re: CTP (Oct 2014).pdf).
The comment period on the CTP closed on 11/3/14. For the Committee's reference, draft materials
continue to be available here:
CTP Executive Summary:
http://www.ccta.net/about/download/53ebd36c3785b.pdf
Volume 1, Full CTP Update:
http://ccta.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=63&meta_id=4579
Volume 2, Subarea Action Plans compiled for viewing in one file:
http://ccta.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=63&meta_id=4580
Volume 3, Draft Comprehensive Transportation Project and Programs Listing:
http://ccta.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=63&meta_id=4581
Regarding the November 2014 CTP Update, and considering the recent close of the comment
period, CCTA staff is currently compiling the input and preparing to respond. The latest comment
summary developed by CCTA is attached: CTP Comments (11/4/14 Report to CBPAC).pdf.
In the context of a potential transportation sales tax in 2016, the attached document, "November
2014 Local Elections for Transportation Purposes" was distributed at a recent CCTA meeting. Of
six measures for transportation purposes listed, 5 passed.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive report on the CTP Update and direct staff as appropriate.
2) STATE
A) Midterm Elections: We are currently between legislative sessions and interpreting the
implications of the midterm elections. County staff and the County's legislative advocate will be
present to update the committee on the following:
Implications of changes to the delegation (new roster following, outgoing representative in
parenthesis)
Iron Horse Right of Way Issue
School Safety and Siting (updated CSAC legislative proposal, see attached: School Safety
School Safety and Siting (updated CSAC legislative proposal, see attached: School Safety
Bill Proposal-CC County-V2 (11/7/14).pdf)
Relevant State Legislative Platform Issues
AD 11: Jim Frazier
AD 14: Susan Bonilla
AD 15: Tony Thurmond (Nancy Skinner)
AD 16: Catharine Baker (Joan Buchanan)
_____________________________
SD 9: Loni Hancock
SD 7: Mark DeSaulnier
B) School Siting & Safety; there are limited activities to report on given that we are between
legislative sessions. County staff and our legislative advocate will look ahead to opportunities in
2015 to achieve our goals. Please note the following recent developments.
Regarding the Governor's Plans for School Construction Funding; with the demise of AM
Buchanan's School Construction Bond Bill (AB 2235) due to the Governor's opposition, the need
for school construction funding has become dire. Some resolution to imminent exhaustion of the
bond cap was thought to move ahead in 2013, and then 2014. It is doubtful that this could be
stretched past 2015 in to 2016 without claims of a crisis. The understanding is that the Governor
will make some fundamental changes in how schools are funded in the 2015 budget (see attached:
10/20/14 Gov Plan for School Construction $.pdf.). This was the same message that was broadcast
in 2014, but again, did not end up playing out.
Staff and our legislative advocate are hoping to capitalize on this situation (fundamental changes
in school construction funding) by appealing to the Governor for consideration of the County's
concerns with school siting and safety. The attached letter was transmitted (see attached: 11/5/14
Letter BOS to Gov. Re: School Siting-Safety.pdf.), and in addition to appealing to the Governor,
will be used to approach Caltrans to discuss our 2015 bill proposal regarding enhanced school
safety zones.
Regarding the Enhanced School Zone Safety Zone: 2015 Bill Proposal; with the Governor's
stated opposition to monetary fines, the penalty has been changed to increase the point penalty
levied against drivers licenses for moving violations in the school zone. This mirrors penalties for
commercial drivers who are held to a higher standard given their profession.
That higher standard will be applied to motor vehicle operators driving in the school zone. The
rationale for the higher standard in the school zone is that drivers are sharing the road right of way
with the K-12 population who have physiological limitations and generally greater sensitivity.
(see attached: School Safety Bill Proposal - CC County - V2 (11/7/14).pdf).
This proposal is moving through both the County legislative development process and that of the
California State Association of Counties (CSAC). The update on both of those processes is as
follows:
The County's Legislation Committee approved the proposal at their November 6, 2014
meeting and will be brought to the Board of Supervisors.
CSAC discussed the proposal at their 2014 Annual Meeting in November and recommended
moving ahead with the proposal.
moving ahead with the proposal.
Children have: 1) less developed depth perception, (which is even more pronounced when
interpreting objects in motion), 2) hearing that is less sophisticated, (direction, size, and speed
interpretation), 3) limited attention capacity (impulsive and easily distracted), and 2) not fully
developed the concept of left and right (until age 7). These physiological capacities are all
essential to using and crossing roads safely and cannot entirely be mitigated by education or other
safety training.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive report on School Siting & Safety and direct staff as
appropriate.
3) FEDERAL
Results from the midterm elections have not, as of yet, included any concrete implications for the
current federal transportation funding bill, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century
(MAP-21). The current extension expires May 31, 2015. Staff will bring information forward as it
becomes available.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
CONSIDER Report on Local, State, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues and
take ACTION as appropriate including CONSIDERATION of specific recommendations in the
report above.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments
CTP_Schedule_2014-11-19.pdf
BOS to CCTA re CTP (Oct 2014).pdf
CTP Comments (11-24-14 Report to CBPAC).pdf
School Safety Bill Proposal-CC County-V2 (11-7-14).pdf
11-5-14 Letter - BOS to Gov Re School Siting-Safety.pdf
10-20-14 - Gov Plan for School Construction $.pdf
November 2014 Local Elections for Transportation Purposes
2013 2014 2015 2016
J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
Countywide
Transportation
Plan (CTP) &
Transportation
Expenditure Plan
(TEP)
Action Plans
Environmental
Impact Report
Stakeholder
Outreach
Focus Groups and
Polling
Public Education
and Outreach
Overall Schedule
2014 Countywide Transportation Plan, Action Plans and Transportation Expenditure Plan
November 19, 2014
CTP issues & Action
Plan status
Vision, Goals & CTP
Alternatives Release Draft CTP
Release initial draft
Action PlansReview MTSOs & actions
Release draft
Action Plans
Adopt
2014 CTP
Release RFP
for EIR consultant Approve EIR contract
Adopt final Action Plans
Certify Final
CTP EIR
Develop stakeholder list
& general questions
Release Notice
of Preparation
Release Draft
CTP EIR
Prepare proposed
final Action Plans
Release Draft TEP
for Public Review
Adopt
Final TEP
Board of Supervisors
Places Measure on Ballot
Vote on TEP
Measure
Approve
Final Draft TEP
Review Public
Comments
Review public
outreach
approach
Begin public education
and outreach
Report on responses
Update on
stakeholder
interviews
Report on
stakeholder
interviews
Present Draft CTP to RTPCs
Develop questions
Engage RTPCs on TEP;
Develop stakeholder list
& general questions
Develop stakeholder list
& general questions
Report on responses Report on responses
Report on stakeholder
interviews
Report on stakeholder
interviews
Develop
questions
Develop
questions
Report on responses
CCTA staff/consultant begin work Authority/RTPC review/approval Public review/outreach Staff/consultant work products
Local Review
& Approval
Kevin Romick, Chair -CCTA
October 21,2014
Page 2 of9
Nationally, there is a well-documented, growing need to address our aging
infrastructure. On the local level it is no different; we are straining to maintain adequate
pavement conditions while being required to be compliant with new water quality,
complete streets, and greenhouse gas reduction statutes and initiatives. While the need
for adequate maintenance funding is mentioned throughout the document, the scale
of the issue warrants a much more prominent discussion in the CTP, particularly
given the discussion of new revenue sources.
Transit Service Improvements
There is increasing pressure to improve transit service due, in part, to new State
statutes. As called out in the CTP, our maturing transportation network'and land use
patterns are at the point where we are facing diminishing returns on roadway capacity.
In this light transit investments may be more attractive. Transit agencies in Contra Costa
County are likely to need additional resources to respond to this increase in demand for
service and the draft CTP acknowledges this unfunded demand. More specific
comments:
• With conventional fixed route service, a number of potential mitigation
measures proposed by the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) in their efforts
to implement SB 743 (2013) relate to improved transit service. As acknowledged
in the ~TP, SB 743 eliminated congestion based transportation impact measures
(level of service/LOS) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A
proposed alternative metric, likely to be Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), is
intended to better reduce greenhouse gas production. However, in Contra Costa,
our local policies compel us to continue using LOS in addition to the new impact
measures imposed by the State. In order to offset any potential adverse impact
on development activity caused by multiple mitigation measures, the Board of
Supervisors requests that the Authority explore the possibility of using an
expansion of bus service or bus service funding to establish a transit mitigation
bank or programmatic VMT mitigation for member agencies.
The Board of Supervisors continues to be committed to the policy of having
development pay for any facilities required to meet the demands resulting from
growth. However, subjecting applicants to the full cost of both LOS and VMT
analysis and mitigation may inappropriately constrain needed economic and
housing development activities.
• Paratransit service for the elderly and people with disabilities, in addition to
requiring additional funding, will also require fundamental administrative
changes if 1) the Authority is to respond adequately to the projected demand for
Kevin Romick, Chair -CCT A
October 21,2014
Page3 o£9
service, and 2) expect that response to be cost-effective. In addition to the oft-
cited demographic changes (aging population), the impact on travel demand for
this portion of our constituency is likely to be further magnified by the
consolidation of medical services and new health trends. The inclusion of these
significant challenges would improve the "new challenges", "challenges ahead"
sections of the CTP.
• The Board of Supervisors is aware of the Authority's efforts to implement the
Mobility Management Plan (MMP) which could improve coordination and
operating efficiencies of multiple transportation providers. We understand that
progress is being made and applaud the efforts of Authority staff in navigating
this complex issue. While we recognize that the MMP is mentioned in the Action
Plan section of the CTP, given the countywide implications of the MMP a
detailed discussion may be warranted in a more prominent place in the
document.
Surveys conducted in the beginning of the CTP indicated that the Authority
should be "more aspirational" in its undertakings. The implementation of a
coordinated, countywide mobility management program would be responsive to
that direction.
Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Program
The Authority's Safe Routes to School Master Plan Task Force assisted with the
development of a needs assessment to estimate the cost of SR2S projects and programs.
The Board of Supervisors thanks the Authority for their leadership on this effort and we
look forward to the findings and recommendations being implemented.
In order to make better use of past and future SR2S investments, we encourage the
Authority to capitalize on one particular finding in the 2011 survey conducted early in
the Master Plan effort. The survey established that the most consistent reason cited by
parents and school administrators for K-12 students not walking and bicycling to school
is related to traffic, either "driver behavior'' or "driving too fast". This finding is consistent
with statewide and national survey results.
The County has developed a 2015legislative proposal to enhance school zones through
expansion and increased penalties. We have met with our legislative delegation on our
proposal. The members were supportive of the concept and offered assistance. The
County is in the process of securing support from other agencies and we are formally
requesting the Authority support in this effort. The goal of the legislation, in
combination with existing projects and program, is to assist in reversing the well-
known low walk and bike rates to and from K-12 school. This may be another area
Kevin Romick, Chair -CCTA
October 21,2014
Page4 of9
where the Authority could be responsive to the "more aspirational" findings in the
surveys.
Major Projects & Emerging Planning Initiatives
A comprehensive response on project priorities can be seen in the attached list. This list
includes the Board of Supervisors high priority projects including, but not limited to,
TriLink (SR239), North Richmond Truck Route, I-680 HOV Gap Closure, Iron
Horse/Lafayette-Moraga Trail Connector, Kirker Pass Road Truck Climbing Lane, Vasco
Road Safety Improvements, and Northern Waterfront Goods Movement Infrastructure
Projects.
In addition to these projects, the Board of Supervisors requests continued Authority
advocacy and fu ... 11ding for activities supportive of economic development in areas of the
County where such investment is needed and desired by local communities. For
instance, this support could fund activities within Priority Development Area (PDAs)
and as part of the Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative. We are
supportive of CTP actions that include planning and implementation funding for
transportation projects and programs, infrastructure improvements and other
expenditures that facilitate needed economic development. Such investment will help
balance jobs and housing and make more efficient use of our transportation
infrastructure. The Board of Supervisors considers these efforts as integral to the
continued growth of our region and economy.
CHAPTER COMMENTS
Executive Summary
Page ES-3
The telecommuting information is informative; the document would benefit from other
relevant changes in commute patterns listed. Nationwide, bicycle commuting has
doubled in a shorter time frame than telecommuting and the Authority has more direct
responsibility to facilitate further growth in this area.
Page ES-13
Sustainable Communities Strategy
The Board of Supervisors thanks the Authority for their tireless engagement with the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area
Governments on the process to implement SB375. In particular, we encourage continued
advocacy for additional resources and consideration for subareas that accommodate a
substantial amount of planned growth. For the benefit of our constituents, MTC, and
the State, it may be useful to point out in the CTP that our planned growth is, and has
Kevin Romick, Chair -CCTA
October 21, 2014
PageS o£9
been for some time, well-managed not through State or regional mandate but through a
voter-approved Urban Limit Line and Growth Management Program ..
Pages ES-11-14The information on SB 375 (2008) in the document is useful given the
land use and transportation emphasis in the legislation. However, we believe that
additional focus on AB 32 (2006), in particular the Cap-and-Trade Program, should be
included in the CTP. This information could better position the County to receive
Program revenues. At a minimum, the relationship between the "transformative" transit
investments contemplated in the CTP and the "Affordable Housing and Sustainable
Communities" and "Transit and Intercity Rail Capital" Cap-and-Trade programs should be
strengthened.
Prior to contemplating a new transportation sales tax, we believe all other funding
opportunities should be examined and maximized to the extent possible in the CTP.
As indicated earlier in this letter and acknowledged later in the CTP, SB 743 (2013) is
likely to substantially influence how agencies can 1) claim exemption from CEQA and
2) how we will analyze and mitigate the transportation impacts for development. While
implementation policies are still being developed by the State; some mention of the
issue in the Executive Summary is warranted considering the potential impact on
member jurisdictions and the development community.
At this time, focus on SB 743 issues is being directed at the State. This is understandable
given that implementation strategies are currently being developed. However, once the
State's work is finished, focus will shift to local jurisdictions who are ultimately
responsible for analyzing and mitigating for VMT. As mentioned earlier·in this letter,
additional attention should be given to potential mitigation strategies. This would be
valuable to both your member agencies and the development community.
The Board of Supervisors appreciates the Authority's efforts to engage the State on this
critical issue.
Page ES-20
Regarding the need to "renew the sales tax measure", prior to establishing this need in
policy we ask that the Authority conduct additional outreach to all member
jurisdictions, including all members of the Board Supervisors. As you are aware, the
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has diverse obligations which vary
substantially throughout Supervisorial Districts. In considering whether to support
such a measure the Board of Supervisors would consider factors such as possible
Kevin Romick, Chair -CCT A
October 21, 2014
Page 6 o£9
conflicts with other public finance priorities, and the need for additional transportation
funding.
Introduction
Page 1-15
This section discusses auto-ownership rates and age distribution in the context of
demographics. Mention of the increase in the elderly segment of the population, and the
impact on transportation needs, would serve to make the demographics discussion
more useful in the context of the CTP.
Figure 3-1: Roadway Action Plan Projects and Programs
The park/open space data used to compile this figure (and other Figures with the same
data) is outdated. It is important that the most current dataset is used so that the status
of preserved lands relative to planned improvements is understood. This will help
avoid conflicts between transportation planning and conservation efforts. Notably,
conserved land data is missing from areas around Vasco Road, the Byron Airport, and
along Kirker Pass Road south of the City of Pittsburg. A current dataset can be obtained
from East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy.
As I am sure you are aware, many critical transportation projects have received
streamlined permitting as a result of this program including Vasco Road Widening, SR-
4/S-160 Connectors, Deer Valley Road safety shoulders, eBART, State Route 4 between
Lone Tree and San Jose Avenue (including Sand Creek Interchange), and State Route 4
medians and shoulders from Discovery Bay to Byron Highway.
Vision, Goals and Strategy
Page I-28
The Board of Supervisors supports the approach described in the "Finding the Right
Balance" section. The approach of "Recognizing the differing needs and situations of Contra
Costa's subareas ... " has worked well in this diverse County in the past. We expect it to
continue to be successful well into the future.
Page 1-29
Goal1: Movement of people
With respect to the language in the first Goal, " ... all available travel modes ... ", the
subsequently listed Strategies would be more representative of all modes, and more
consistent with Goal 3, if non-motorized facilities w ere to be addressed in a manner
similar to the road system.
Kevin Romick, Chair -CCTA
October 21,2014
Page7 o£9
For example, "Define and close gaps in the Countywide and Regional Bikeway Network,
including gaps in Class I and major off-street paths". In addition, this change would
improve internal consistenc}" in the "Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities" section the
following action is highlighted, "Close gaps in the regional trail system ... ".
Goal1: Movement of Goods
Consistent with Authority support for, and assistance with the Northern Waterfront
Economic Development Initiative, please include the following language, "Identify new
strategies to improve freight movement on freeways, waterways and rail lines to improve
air quality and the safety and efficiency of goods movement".
Page 1-32
The discussion regarding "Maintaining the transportation system" would be more
informative and complete if new requirements, often required to be implemented
concurrent with maintenance projects, were described in this section. Complete streets
and water quality requirements can result in substantially increased maintenance costs.
Page 1-36
"Our ability to expand the roadway system is extremely limited": In addition to the barriers
to roadway expansion listed in this section (limited right-of-way, noise, air pollution,
etc.), please include "expanding maintenance obligations".
Page 1-41
Transit, Including Buses, Rail, Paratransit, and Ferries
As indicated in the Priorities section above, some mention of Authority leadership on
the implementation of the MMP would be informative in this section.
Page 1-51
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
This section may benefit from a review by the Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian
Advisory Committee (CBPAC) who could assist in finding solutions to the numerous
barriers to improving non-motorized transportation identified in the CTP.
The barriers to increased walking and cycling identified in the CTP are not unique to
Contra Costa County. These barriers can be addressed through a methodical planning
and investment response. The 2009 Update to MTC's Regional Bicycle Plan for the San
Kevin Romick, Chair -CCTA
October 21,2014
Page 8 o£9
Francisco Bay Area indicates that Contra Costa County is tied with Solano County for
the lowest rate of bicycle commuters. A strategic approach to address identified barriers
and improve that ranking may be another "aspirational program". As indicated in the
draft CTP, the County has numerous attributes that we could capitalize on; excellent
climate, favorable topography, an excellent multi-use path network, and second only to
Alameda County in terms of numbers of BART stations.
On a related note, the Authority may wish to consider combining the Safe Routes to
School Master Plan Task Force with the CBPAC to form an "Active Transportation
Working Group". The subject matter addressed by the committees is similar and
combining the committees may result in a critical mass of issues to address that would
ideally lead to regular consultation and collaboration.
Page 1-61
Facilities for Goods Movement
The Board of Supervisors appreciates the Authority's assistance with the Northern
Waterfront Economic Development Initiative. Considering the initiative addresses
goods movement infrastructure including maritime, rail, and highway projects, some
mention of the Northern Waterfront effort would strengthen this section.
Page 1-65
The Board of Supervisors welcomes the description of the Comprehensive
Transportation Project List (CTPL) as "evolving". As subregional and local priorities
change and we are required to respond to changing policies it is essential that we are
afforded the flexibility of a "living document".
Page 1-105
Implementation
The comments in this letter suggest possible changes to activities listed in the
Implementation section including, but not limited to; 1) addition of State policy
advocacy, and 2) updates to other Measure J implementation documents as suggested at
the Technical Coordinating Committee (Technical Procedures Manual, Measure J
Growth Management Implementation Guide, etc).
The Board of Supervisors appreciates the outreach of the Authority Board and its staff
to obtain comments on the Draft CTP Update and we look forward to additional dialog
and engagement on this effort.
Kevin Romick, Chair -CCTA
October 21, 2014
Page9 o£9
Sincerely,
ci6 }1u:t~ Ka~Chair
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Supervisor, District IV
C:
Janet Abelson, Chair-WCCTAC
Candace Andersen, Chair-SWAT
Salvatore Evola, Chair, TRANSPLAN
Mark Ross, Chair -TRANSPAC
Attachments:
Comments on Volume 3: Comprehensive Transportation Project List
File: Transportation> Transpmiation > Committees > CCT t, : CCT A Board of Directors
File: TrJnspmtation: Projects: CCTA ~ CTP 2014-15
g:\transpmiationl20 14ctpupdate\bostocctar~20 14ctpfinal( I 0-21-14 ).doc
Project Project Name Project Type Description Total Proj11ct Cost Project Status Primary RTPC ID Spons«
COUNTYWIDE PROJECTS
Upgrade curb ramps to current
standards throughout
Unincorporated Contra Costa
County through an annual project
Countywide Curb ADA to eventually provide pedestrian $3,000,000 Ongoing Contra Costa All
Ramp Program access to all users on all County County
roads . This annual project Is In
addition to curb ramp upgrades
Implemented adjacent to capital
improvement projects.
Upgrade metal beam guard ralls to
Countywide Guard Rail meet current Caltrans Standards. Contra Costa Safety The upgrade relates to $5,000,000 Planning All Upgrade replacement of the end County
treatments.
Provide an overlay and/or cold-1n-
4411 Countywide Overlay ArteriaVRoadway place recycling to Vasco Road, $3,423,000 Design and ROW Contra Costa All Project Pleasant Hill Road (NB) and Byron County
Highway.
WCCTAC PRO.IECTS
Add transit stop access and
2767 San Pablo Dam Road Arterial/Roadway amenities, sidewalks and other $7,300,000 Design and ROW Contra Costa WCCTAC Walkabillty Project improvements to pedestrian and County
bicycle facilities, turn lanes.
Extend truck climbing lane on
Cummings Skyway eastbound Cummings Skyway to Contra Costa 322S Truck Oimbing Lane ArteriaVRoadway allow faster moving vehicles to $1,500,000 Not Begun County WCCTAC
Extension safely pass slow moving trucks
dim bing existing 10% grade.
Extend Pittsburg Avenue 0.3 miles
eastward, and extend either
Seventh_ Street or Soto Street 0.1
3350 North Richmond Truck Arterial/Roadway mile northward, to intersect with $19,300,000 Not Begun Contra Costa WCCTAC Route Project each other and create a truck route County
from the North Richmond
industrial area to the Richmond
Parkway.
widen Parr Boulevard to bring it to
Parr Boulevard arterial standard design and Contra Costa 3353 Widening and Overlay ArteriaVRoadway overlay, on a one-mile stretch from $2,772,000 Not Begun County WCCTAC
Richmond Parkway to the Union
Pacific tracks.
Realign either Goodrick Avenue or
Third Street I Goodrick Third Street as it approaches Parr Contra Costa
3435 Avenue Realignment Arterial/Roadway Boulevard to create a direct north-$1,750,000 Not Begun County WCCTAC
Project south route and only one
intersection with Parr Boulevard.
North Richmond Reconstruct York Street and Contra Costa
3436 Overlay I Arterial/Roadway overlay Goodrick Avenue $3S9,000 Not Begun County WCCTAC
Reconstruction
Appian Way and ArteriaVRoadway Install signal at Appian Way and $175,000 Not Begun Contra Costa WCCTAC 3534 Pebble Drive Signal Pebble Drive. County
Remove and combine with 3536
3536 Appian Way Complete Arterial/Roadway Construct Appian Way ultimate $4,300,000 Underway Contra Costa WCCTAC Streets Project improvements. County
3537 Appian Way Widening Arterial/Roadway Modify layout of Appian Way and $4,000,000 Underway Contra Costa WCCTAC at Triangle Valley View. Potential roundabout. County
Brookside Drive Acquire ultimate right of way to Contra Costa
3543 Arterial/Roadway widen Brookside Drive from 3rd $772,000 Not Begun WCCTAC Widening Street to railroad tracks County
3545 Castro Ranch Road ArteriaVRoadway Widen Castro Ranch Road. $1,600,000 Not Begun Contra Costa WCCTAC Widening County
El Portal Drive
Widening: Richmond ArteriaVRoadway Widen El Portal Drive $450,000 Not Begun Contra Costa WCCTAC 3572 Oty limit to San Pablo County
Dam Road
I Project l ID
ProJect Name Project Type Description
North Richmond The project consists of extending
3576 Improvements -Arterial/Roadway Pittsburg Avenue from 3rd Street
Pittsburg Avenue to the proposed 7th Street
Extension extension.
San Pablo Dam Road Construct signal at San Pablo Dam 3587 and Greenrldge Drive Arterial/Roadway
Signal Road and Greenrldge Drive
3S88 San Pablo Dam Road Arterial/Roadway Construct San Pablo Dam Road
Improvements improvements and widening.
3589 San Pablo Dam Road Arterial/Roadway Add a middle lane to San Pablo
Middle Tum Lane Dam Road
Eastward extension of VIllage
Center Drive (Project 230),
El Sobrante Village extending 1,200 feet
3818 Arterial/Roadway east/northeast from Village Center Center Drive East Drive to connect with San Pablo
Dam Road at a point west of the
Las Colinas intersection.
El Sobrante Villase A 60o-foot new street parallel to
3819 Arterial/Roadway San Pablo Dam Road on Its south Center Drive side, with a 76-foot rlsht of way.
San Pablo Dam Road Constnuct sidewalk to fill gaps In
3821 Sidewalks near May Arterial/Roadway the May Road area (Safe Routes to
Road Schools Project).
Replace San Pablo Replace bridse on San Pablo
4051 Avenue Bridse Over Arterial/Roadway Avenue over Rodeo Creek. Bridse
Rodeo Creek has less than SO rating
4334 Appian Way and Arsvle Arterial/Roadway Traffic slsnal at Appian Way and
Road Sisnal Project Argyle Road
Appian Way and Santa
4338 Rita Road Signa l Arterial/Roadway Install traffic signal at lntersectlonl
Project
Fred Jackson Provide travel lanes, bike lanes, Way/Third Street 4350 Complete Street Arterial/Roadway parking lanes and median along
Concepts Plan Fred Jackson Way
Seventh Street Extend Seventh Street, North Extension to Brookside 4351 Drive Improvements Arterial/Roadway Richmond, from Wildcat Creek to
Project Brookside Drive
4587
El Portal Drive
4360 Complete Street Arterial/Roadway Widen to 4 travel lanes
Improvements
Tara Hills Traffic Provide safety Improvements and
4365 Calming/Complete Arterial/Roadway traffic calming measures along Tara
Street Plan Hills Drive
Colusa Avenue Provide median, parking lanes and 4367 Complete Street Arterial/Roadway
Project bike lanes.
4368 Kensington Curb Arterial/Roadway Install ADA compliant a various
Ramps Project location along Kensington Avenue
Arlington Avenue Provide intersection Improvements 4370 Intersection Arterial/Roadway and traffic signals at intersections Improvements
Olinda Road Sidewalk Fill in sidewalk gaps along Olinda
2795 Gap Closures Bicycle/Pedestrian Road Including the Installation of
pedestrian bridge over a creek.
Total Project Cost l'roject Status
$1,700,000 Not Begun
$250,000 Not Begun
$6,500,000 Not Begun
$5,000,000 No Longer
Supported
$1,960,000 Not Begun
$2,220,000 Not Begun
$651,000 Not Begun
Under $3,614,000 Construction
$420,000 Not Begun
$400,000 Not Begun
$2,600,000 Not Begun
$6,325,000 Not Begun
Delete-same
as3589
Delete: Same as
3587
No Longer $400,000 Supported
$1,500,000 Underway
$500,000 Not Begun
$400,000 Underway
$350,000 Not Begun
$522,000 Not Begun
Primary
Sponsor RTPC
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
J
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
1 Project j ID 1..-----------
Project Name ProjiiCt Type Description = TObl Projed~ ~-.sutus ____ ::v_· ----RTPC-------1
Franklin Canyon Sobrante Ridge to Carquinez Strait
3187 Undercrosslng. Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail: construct Franklin Canyon $300,000 Not Begun Contra Costa WCCTAC Sobrante Ridge to undercrossing for regional trail County
Carqulnez Strait Trail access
3188 SR 4 West Bikeway: Bicycle/Pedestrian SR 4 West Bikeway: Construct $2,000,000 Not Begun Contra Costa WCCTAC Construct bikeway parallel to SR 4 west County
The purpose of this project Is to
create a pedestrian friendly
business district for the
Community of El Sobrante by
upgrading the existing aged path of
travel to a new ADA standard
accessible pathway with new
landscaping along San Pablo Dam
Road between Appian Way and
Hillcrest Road. San Pablo Dam
Road is a major arterial through
downtown El Sobrante providing
access to 1-80. It also provides
connection between 180 and SR-24
In Orinda, making it a commuter
San Pablo Dam Rd route carrying approximately
3231 Pedestrian Bicycle/Pedestrian 30,000 vehicles per day. The $3,91S,OOO Under Contra Costa WCCTAC project, in compliance with ADA. Construction County Improvements will include reconstruction of
existing sidewalk, curb and gutter,
and driveway conforms along both
sides of San Pablo Dam Road
between Appian Way and 100 feet
west of Hillcrest Drive; an
approximate project lenllfl of
1,100 feet. The project will also
include limited drainage
modifications, utility adjustments,
street tree removal and
replacement, sign relocation, bus
stop relocation, new potted
landscaping, and removal or
relocation of existing sidewalk
features (street furniture).
Widen sidewalks, calm traffic and
Third Street Pedestrian add streetlights and street trees to Contra Costa 3497 Project, Phase 2 Bicycle/Pedestrian Third Street between Grove $2,300,000 Not Begun County WCCTAC
Avenue and Wildcat Creek In North
Richmond.
Delete: Same as
3231
Upgrade the pedestrian facilities
3789 Crockett Downtown Bicycle/Pedestrian along Pomona Avenue between $351,000 Design and ROW Contra Costa WCCTAC Upgrade Project 2nd Avenue and 1st Avenue In the County
downtown Crockett Area .
Castro Ranch Road AC Build Sidewalk on Castro Ranch contra Costa 3795 Path Bicycle/Pedestrian Road from San Pablo Dam Road to $242,000 Not Begun County WCCTAC
Hillside Drive (east side)
Bridge for pedestrians and bicycles
San Pablo Creek over San Pablo Creek, from Via Contra Costa 3817 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bicycle/Pedestrian Verde Into downtown El Sobrante. $350,000 Not Begun County WCCTAC
Bridge Will connect to walkway along San
Pablo Creek
Cummings Skyway Bike Construct Class II bike lanes on Contra Costa 4079 Bicycle/Pedestrian Cummings Skyway from Crockett $3,500,000 Not Begun WCCTAC Lanes Blvd. to Franklin Canyon Rd. County
Install 3,000 ft of sidewalk,
drainage,
Montalvin Manor installation/improvements, Contra Costa 4178 Sidewalk and Transit Bicycle/Pedestrian installation of two new bus $1,810,000 Complete County WCCTAC
Access Improvements shelters, and installation of ADA
accessible curb ramps along San
Pablo Avenue and Kay Road.
Railroad crossing pedestraln
4184 Chesley Ave Railroad Bicycle/Pedestrian facilities, 5 foot wide sidewalk, $140,000 Complete Contra Costa WCCTAC Pedestrian Crossing curb gutter, railroad warning County
devices.
Project
ID
4188
4189
4352
4353
4354
4363
4364
4366
4369
4444
4445
4446
4447
4S21
PrOJect Name
Market Avenu e
Railroad Pedestrian
Crossing
Market Avenue
Sidewalk
Improvements
N. Richmond
Pedestrian and
Community
Enhancement
Hillside Drive Sidewalk
GapOosure
Valley View Road Bike
Lanes Project
San Pablo Avenue
Complete Street
Project
Tara Hills Drive
Complete Street
Pedestrian
Improvements
Dolan Way Pedestrian
Improvements Project
Rincon Road Widening
and Pedestrian
Improvements Project
Rodeo Downtown &
Waterfront
Infrastructure Program
6th Street Rodeo
Sidewalk Project
7th Street Rodeo
Sidewalk Project
Pomona Ave Sidewalk
Project
West County Safe
Routes to School
Expansion Project
TRANSPAC PROJECTS
Contra Costa Centre
ADD Treat
Blvd/1680 Bicycle and
Pedestrian
Project Type Description
Improves the pedestrian facilities
along the north side of Market
Bicycle/Pedestrian Avenue between 7th Street and
Soto Street, west of the Union
Pacific Railroad crossing
Improve the pedestrian facilities
along the north side of Market
Avenue by constructing 6.5-foot
Bicycle/Pedestrian wide concrete sidewalk, curb,
gutter, and curb ramps between
7th Street and Soto Street, west of
the Union Pacific Railroad crossing.
Installation of sidewalk, curb and
gutter, curb ramps, and bulb outs
within the North Richmond PDA.
The location Is the area north of
Bicycle/Pedestrian Market Avenue, south of Wildcat
Creek, east of Fred Jackson Way
and west of the railroad tracks In
the vicinity of Verde Elementary
School.
Provide a 5 feet wide sidewalk on
Bicycle/Pedestrian the north side of Hillside Drive, El
Sobrante.
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide class II bike lanes on both
sides of Valley View Road .
Provide pedestrian and bicycle
Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements from Rodeo to
Crockett
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide a pathway to Montara Bay
Park
Close a 70 feet long sidewalk gap,
Bicycle/Pedestrian provide curb ramps along Dolan
Way, bulb-outs at Flannery Road.
Provide minimum 12' travel lanes
and 5' wide sidewalk along one
Bicycle/Pedestrian side of Rincon Road. Grading,
retaining walls and right of way
acquisition would be required.
Install curb, sidewalks, gutters,
Bicycle/Pedestrian ADA compliant ramps in downtown
area
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk on one side of 6th
Street
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk on one side
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk of south side of
Pomona St, ret. Wall.
Expand the West Contra Costa
SR25 program to add 2 additional
elementary schools to each
Safe Routes to School jurisdiction within West Contra
Costa: Richmond, San Pablo, El
Cerrito, Pinole, Hercules, and the
unincorporated area.
Ped/Bike improvements along
Bicycle/Pedestrian Treat Boulevard between the Iron
Horse Trail, through the (1-680)
over-crossing to Geary
Total Project Cost Projed Status
$227,000 Complete
$280,000 Complete
$4,200,000 Not Begun
Under $200,000 Construction
$250,000 Not Begun
11,200,000 Not Begun
$600,000 Under
Construction
Desian and $650,000 ROW
$2,500,000 Not Begun
$1,116,000 Not Begun
$375,000 Not Begun
$480,000 Not Begun
$450,000 Not Begun
$801,800 Under
Construction
TBD Planning
Primary
Soonsor RTPC
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
WCCTAC
TRANSPAC
Project
ID
3579
3586
3765
3768
3770
4179
4180
4336
4337
4340
--
4373
4375
4378
I
Proje.:tName
Pacifica Avenue Left
Turn Pocket at Rio
VIsta School
Rudgear Road/San
Miguel Drive/Walnut
Boulevard/Mountain
VIew Boulevard Safety
Improvements
Deer Valley Road
Safety Improvements
Treat Boulevard
Reconstruction
Alhambra Valley Road
Shoulder Widening.
East of Castro Ranch
Alhambra Valley Road
Improvements-
Ferndale Rd to Rancho
La Boca Rd
Alhambra Valley Road
Improvements -
Alhambra Creek Road
and Quail Lane
Olympic Boulevard and
Brldgeflefd Road Signal
Project
N. Buchanan ar and
Pacheco Blvd Signal
Project
Bailey Road and Mary
Anne Lane Signal
Project
Livorna Road and
Intersection
Improvements at
Wilson Rd
Stone Valley Road at
Roundhill Road
Improvements
Livorna Road
Improvements
Project Type Description
Construct left tum pocket at Rio Arterial/Roadway Vista Elementary School.
Safety improvements for Rudgear
Arterial/Roadway Road, San Miguel Drive, Walnut
Boulevard, and Mountain View
Boulevard.
Develop shoulder projects, curve
Arterial/Roadway alignments, etc. along Deer Valley
Road.
Remove and relplace asphalt
overlay and bring curb ramps Into
ADA compliance. The project will
Arterial/Roadway remove and replace the existing
rubberized asphalt overlay that
covers Treat Boulevard from
Buskirk Avenue to the bridge
structure at Walnut Creek Channel
Shoulder widemng ~long Alhambra
Valley Road. This project improves
a section of Alhambra Valley Road,
beginning from approximately
4, 700 feet east of Castro Ranch
Road, going east 1,650 feet. This
project consists of; road widening
Arterial/Roadway for shoulders, slope cutting and
retaining wall construction on the
north side of the road to
accommodate the road widening,
place guardrail, striping, relocate I
remove I add new signage, etc. The
proposed shoulder widening will
also serve as a aass Ill bicycle
facility.
Realignment, widening, pavement
reflector markers repair, traffic
Arterial/Roadway warning sign and striping on
Alhambra Valley Road between
Ferndale Road and Rancho La Boca
Road .
Arterial/Roadway
Provide traffic signal at Olympic Arterial/Roadway Boulevard and Bridgefield Road
Arterial/Roadway Install traffic signal at intersection
Install signal at Bailey Rd/Mary Ann ArteriaVRoadway Ln
Install signal, tum pockets, bicycle
Arterial/Roadway and pedestrian safety
improvements at the intersection.
Remove, no longer supported.
Road diet/crosswalk improvements Arterial/Roadway at Roundhill Road Intersection
Arterial/Roadway Provide Standard pavement width
along Livorna Road
Total Project Cost ProJect Status
$375,000 Not Begun
$350,000 Design/Const
$1,400,000 Not Begun
$2,241,000 Not Begun
$2,000,000 Not Begun
$890,000 Design and
ROW
$490,000 Not Begun
$415,000 Not Begun
$585,000 Not Begun
Under $585,000 Construction
Design and $2,000,000 ROW
$500,000 Not Begun
Delete Project
$85,000 Not Begun
Primary
Sponsor RTPC
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
completed
Contra Costa
County
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANS PAC
------
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
Project
ID
4438
4439
4440
4441
4442
4451
4455
4456
4457
4458
4460
4474
3215
3584
Project Name
Whyte Park Avenue
Sidewalk Project
Ped Bridge at Dewing
Lane across Las Trampas
Creek
Pedestrian facilities for
San Miguel Drive
Newell Avenue Pedestrian
Path Project
Boulevard Way Sidewalk
Project
Monterey Street Safety
Improvements
Bay Area Ridge Trail
Connection at Benicia
Bridge
Pacheco Boulevard
Sidewalk Gap Closure
Phase II
Pacheco Blvd Complete
Street Concept Plan
Aspen Drive Pedestrian
Improvements
Pacheco Blvd Pedestrian
Path under AT&SF Bridge
Gloria Terrace Sidewalk
Project
Olympic Corridor Trail
Connector Study
Pomona Street I Winslow
Avenue I Carquinez
Scenic Drive Safety
Alignment Study
Project Type Description
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk
Construct a pedestrian bridge to Bicycle/Pedestrian cross creek
Provide a 4' wide walkable
Bicycle/Pedestrian shoulder one side, ret. walls,
grading, r/w acquisition required.
AC Pedestrian path along Newell
Bicycle/Pedestrian Avenue from Parkmead
Elementary to Las Lomas High.
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk
Pipe existing 100ft. long ditch,
Bicycle/Pedestrian drainage Improvements, provide
walkable shoulders
Pedestrian and Bicycle upgrades at
Bicycle/Pedestrian Benicia Bridge to provide
connection for the Bay Area Ridge
Trail.
Provide sidewalk, parking lane and
Bicycle/Pedestrian bike lane
Provide medians, sidewalk, parking
Bicycle/Pedestrian lane, and bike lanes along Pacheco
Blvd
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide a 12 foot wide AC path
along park
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide Pedestrian Path under
AT&SFBrldge
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide a sidewalk or walkable
shoulders.
This study will identify options for
improving the non-motorized
connection between the Lafayette-
Moraga Trail (LMn and the Iron
Horse Trail (IHT). Study elements
include public outreach, alternative
identification, selection of
preferred alignment, preliminary
design, cost, phasing. This study Is
needed to Improve the current
connection (an inconsistent variety
of on and off-street facilities) with
a lower stress (e.g. off-street)
connection similar to that of the
LMT & IHT in the Olympic
Study Boulevard Corridor. The LMT and
the IHT are popular multi-use paths
providing a low-stress (off-street)
option for pedestrians and cyclists.
This study will examine options for
connecting these two facilities with
a similar off-street connection in
the Olympic Boulevard corridor.
This connection, in addition to the
existing IHT connection to the
Contra Costa Canal Trail, would
create a continuous connection
joining Concord, Danville,
Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga,
Pleasant Hill, San Ramon, and
Walnut Creek.
Alignment Studies for Pomona
Study Street, Winslow Avenue, and
Carquinez Scenic Drive.
Total Project Cost Project Statu!
$80,000 Not Begun
$1,500,000 Not Begun
$1,500,000 Not Begun
$1,200,000 Not Begun
$980,000 Not Begun
$550,000 Not Begun
$300,000 Not Begun
Under $1,148,000 Construction
$1,500,000 Not Begun
$250,000 Not Begun
$200,000 Not Begun
$1,800,000 Not Begun
$195,000 Not Begun
$50,000
Primary
Sponsor RTPC
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
_ _j
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANSPAC
Project
ID
4424
4430
4431
4448
4449
4450
4452
4454
4459
2609
3580
3782
3799
PfOiectName Project Type
Taylor Boulevard Safety Arterial/Roadway Improvement Project
Center Avenue Widening
(Marsh Drive I Pacheco Arterial/Roadway
Boulevard)
Center Avenue Widening
(Pacheco Boulevard to Arterial/Roadway
Blackwood Drive)
Peach Street Closure Arterial/Roadway Project
Alhambra Valley Rd guard Arterial/Roadway rail/realignment Project
Bear Creek Road Safety Arterial/Roadway Improvements
McNabney Marsh Open
Space Connection to Arterial/Roadway
Waterfront Road Project
Alhambra Valley Road
Safety Improvements Arterial/Roadway
Project
Pacheco Boulevard Arterial/Roadway Realignment
Pleasant Hill BART Station
Bicycle and Pedestrian Bicycle/Pedestrian
Access
Pacifica Avenue Phase II:
Improvements Bicycle/Pedestrian
Pleasant Hill BART
Shortcut Pedestrian Path Bicycle/Pedestrian
Pacheco Blvd Bike and Bicycle/Pedestrian Pedestrian Project
Description
Safety and capacity Improvement
project
Widen to 4 lanes, and provide
sidewalks on both sides
Widen to 4 lanes, and provide
sidewalks on both sides
Close Peach Street and provide a
cul-de-sac.
Guard rail upgrade to current
standards
Safety Improvement along Bear
Creek Rd
Provide entrance and connecting
road to McNabney Marsh Open
Space from Waterfront Rd
Realign horiz.and vert. curves;
widen travel; install paved
shoulders and shoulder backing;
relocate roadside obstacles
Realign grade crossing with AT&SF
Improve access for pedestrian and
bicyclists
Widen both sides of roadway
between Driftwood Drive and Rio
Vista Elementary School and Install
bike lane striping. driveway
conforms, concrete curbs, and
minor drainage. Construct sidewalk
both sides and drainage facilities.
Plan, Design, and Construct a
shortcut path at the Pleasant Hill
BART Station.
The purpose of this project Is to
help create a walkable, pedestrian-
friendly neighborhood and
business district. Pacheco
Boulevard Is a minor arterial road,
with daily average trips (ADTl of
18,519. Installation of a
continuous sidewalk and bike
infrastructure will eliminate safety
concerns and encourage residents
to choose alternative modes of
transportation. This project will
close the last gap of sidewalk and
bike lanes on the north side of
Pacheco Boulevard. This project
will construct approximately 1,200
linear feet of 6.5' wide concrete
sidewalk with curb and gutter and
a 5' wide class II bike lane from
Wind hover Way to 230' south of
Morello Avenue. Driveway
conforms will be installed as
required. The project will Include
ADA compliant curb ramps to be
installed at the comers of
Windhover Way and Goree Court,
retaining walls, removal of two
earthen mounds, relocating utility
poles, installation of a storm drain
inlet, some pavement and striping.
Total Project Cost Project Status
$670,000 Not Begun
$416,000 Not Begun
Delete: Same as $416,000 3546
$350,000 Not Begun
$450,000 Not Begun
$850,000 Not Begun
$350,000 Not Begun
$2,764,000 Under
Construction
$17,000,000 Not Begun
$2,444,000 Design and ROW
Under $675,000 Construction
$2,800,000 Not Begun
$1,150,000 Under
Construction
Prim'lllry
Sponsor RTPC
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
i Project
I ID
Project Nam1o Project Type Description
~ ------------------------------------------
Design and ce>nstruct Class I trail
3800 Carquinez Scenic Trail Bicycle/Pedestrian along closed Carquniez Scenic
Drive between Port Costa and
Martin
Construct a class 2 bicycle lane on
3rd Street between Grove Ave and
3801 North Richmond Bikeway Bicycle/Pedestrian a class 1 on Wildcat Trail and a
Project class 3 bicycle route on Market
Ave. between 3rd Stand the
County limits.
Pe>rt Costa -Martinez Repair and recontstruct trail into a
3807 Bike/Ped Trail Bicycle/Pedestrian Class I multi-use bicycle/pedestrian
trail.
San Pablo Avenue I Connecting a gap in the sidewalk.
3834 Parker Avenue Sidewalk Bicycle/Pedestrian Pre>ject in conjunctie>n with City of
Hercules.
4371 Hemme Avenue Sidewalk Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide 5 feet wide sidewalk, curb
Improvements and gutter
4372 LIVC>rna Road Bikeway Bicycle/Pedestrian Pre>vide a class I bikeway
Tice Valley Blvd Safety Provide a class II bike lane from
4384 Bicycle/Pedestrian Tice Valley Ln at Walnut Creek Improvement border to Iron Horse Trail
4422 Pleasant Hill Road Bicycle Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide class II bike lanes Project
4423 Pleasant Hill Road Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk on west side Sidewalk Project
Closure of sidewalk gaps, repair of
Contra Costa Centre cracked and uplifted surfaces in
4425 Infrastructure Bicycle/Pedestrian sidewalks, crosswalks, and tree
wells, and upgrade of pedestrian Improvements Project facilities to current Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) standards.
4432 Jones Rd Bike Route Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide a class Ill bike route Project
4433 Marshall Drive Sidewalk Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk on both sides
4434 Mayhew Way Sidewalk Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk Project
Pleasant Hill BART area
Bike Route-Las Juntas
4435 Wy, Oak Rd, Wayne Dr Bicycle/Pedestrian Class Ill bike route
(from Jones Rd to
Various)
4436 Springbrook Road Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk Sidewalk Project
Walnut Boulevard Bicycle Provide Pedestrian Path and Bike
4437 Bicycle/Pedestrian Route along north side of Walnut and Pedestrian Project Blvd
Total Pre>jeor:t Cost Project Status
$3,800,000 Complete
$73,000 Not Begun
$1,179,000 Not Begun
Completed
$397,000 Not Begun
$250,000 Ne>t Begun
$344,000 Not Begun
Delete: Study=
3215,New
Project ADDED
$3,000,000 Not Begun
Delete: same as
3215
$270,000 Not Begun
$150,000 Not Begun
$1,105,000 Complete
$100,000 Not Begun
$380,000 Not Begun
$80,000 Not Begun
$100,000 Not Begun
$350,000 Not Begun
Under $1,016,000 Construction
Primary
Spe>nsor ~RTPC
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
Ce>unty
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
l
TRANSPAC
WCCTAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANSPAC
TRANS PAC
TRANSPAC
Project
ID
3597
37S5
3761
3767
3786
3823
4046
4049
4054
4187
4333
4339
4341
4342
4343
4387
4388
Project Name
State Route 4/ Newport
Drive Traffic Signal
Byron Highway Shoulder
Widening
Marsh Creek Road I
Morgan Territory Road
Intersection
Improvements
Marsh Creek Road
Intersection
Improvements, Round
Valley Park to Lydia Lane
Marsh Creek Detention
Facility Bridge
Briones Valley Road
Bridge
Deer Valley Road Safety
Improvements Project
Marsh Creek Safety
Improvements Project
Willow Pass Road Safety
Improvements Project
Driftwood Drive
Landscape Improvement
Project
Byron Highway Bridge
Replacement over
California Acqueduct
Marsh Creek Road and
Deer Valley Road Signal
Project
Marsh Creek Road Bridge
Replacement over Marsh
Creek#141
Marsh Creek Road Bridge
Replacement over Marsh
Creek#143
Marsh Creek Road Bridge
Replacement over Marsh
Creek#145
Interim safety
improvements on Marsh
Creek Road Project
Safety Improvement at
Marsh Creek Rd. at
Clayton Mobile Home
Park Entrance
Project Type
Arterial/Roadway
Arterial/Roadway
ArteriaVRoadway
Arterial/Roadway
ArteriaVRoadway
ArteriaVRoadway
Arterial/Roadway
Arterial/Roadway
ArteriaVRoadway
Arterial/Roadway
Arterial/Roadway
ArteriaVRoadway
Arterial/Roadway
Arterial/Roadway
Arterial/Roadway
ArteriaVRoadway
Arterial/Roadway
Description Total Project Cost Project Status
Install a traffic signal at the
intersection of State Route 4 and $427,000 Not Begun
Newport Drive.
Construct 6' wide paved shoulders
and 2' of shoulder backing along $2,176,000 Not begun
Byron Highway.
This project will widen the travel
lanes to have 12 feet of pavement,
widen the shoulders to a minimum $1,000,000 Not Begun
4 feet of pavement, place a minium
3 feet sholder backing, etc.
The project involves widening the
traveled way, shoulders, and
shoulder backing and making
several roadside improvements $2,492,000 Complete
along a 2,900 ft segment of Marsh
Creek Road from west of Round
Valley Park up to Lydia Lane.
Significant erosion 2005/2006 at
the bridge across from the Marsh Under Creek Detention Facility. $1,644,000 Construction Replacement of the structure is
necessary
Remove the existing wood deck and
superstructure, and construct new bridge $150,000 Not Begun footings, superstructure, and bridge deck
Provide safety improvements along Deer $2,623,000 Not Begun Valley Road
Provide safety improvements along Marsh $1,400,000 Not Begun Creek Road (to be defined).
Construct safety improvements along Willow $1,000,000 Complete Pass Road
repair the existing streetscape along
Driftwood Drive between Evora Road and Jill $750,000 Complete
Avenue in the community of Bay Point.
Replace existing timber bridge with new Design concrete bridge, reconstruct approach and $11,000,000
drainage improvements and ROW
Install traffic signal at intersection and
pavement widening necessary for a tum $1,080,000 Not Begun
pocket
Replace existing timber bridge with new Design concrete bridge in stages, reconstruct $3,800,000
approach and drainage improvements. and ROW
Replace existing timber bridge with new
concrete bridge in stages, reconstruct $4,500,000 Design
approach, drainage improvements and and ROW
retaining walls.
Replace existing timber bridge with new Design concrete bridge in stages, reconstruct $3,000,000 and ROW approach, drainage improvements.
delete:
same as
3786
Install low cost Traffic Calming measures, $350,000 Not Begun slowing/striping enhancements.
Safety Improvements. $150,000 Not Begun
Drimary
Sponior RTPC
Contra Costa TRANS PLAN County
Contra Costa
County TRANSPLAN
Contra Costa
County TRANSPLAN
Contra Costa
County TRANS PLAN
Contra Costa
County TRANSPLAN
Contra Costa TRANSPLAN County
Contra Costa TRANSPLAN County
Contra Costa TRANS PLAN County
Contra Costa TRANSPLAN County
Contra Costa
County TRANS PLAN
Contra Costa TRANSPLAN County
Contra Costa
County TRANSPLAN
Contra Costa TRANSPLAN County
Contra Costa TRANS PLAN County
Contra Costa
County TRANS PLAN
Contra Costa TRANSPLAN County
Contra Costa TRANSPLAN County
Project
ID
4392
4395
4396
4398
4399
4400
4401
4402
4403
4406
4409
4410
4464
4467
3082
3083
3084
3581
Prvject Name Prvject Typ•
Byron Highway at Byron ArterlaVRoadway Elementary School
Morgan Territory Road Arterial/Roadway Safety Improvements
Kit fox crossing near
Marsh Creek Rd. and Arterial/Roadway
Morgan Territory Rd.
Route 84/Vasco Road Arterial/Roadway Widening to County line
Evora Road Widening Arterial/Roadway
Wilbur Avenue Safety ArteriaVRoadway Improvement Project
Deer Valley Road ArterlaVRoaclway Widening Project
Walnut Boulevard Road Arterial/Roadway Widening Project
Byron Highway Safety Arterial/Roadway Enhancement Project
Marsh Creek Rd Safety
Improvements-camino Arterial/Roadway
Diablo Intersection
Marsh Creek Road Safety
Improvements at Arterial/Roadway
Russelman Road
Marsh Creek Road Safety
Improvements west of ArterlaVRoadway
Deer Valley Road
Port Chicago Highway ArterlaVRoadway Safety Improvements
WHiow Pass Road Arterial/Roadway Widening Project
Delta Road: Add Bicycle Bicycle/Pedestrian Lane
Delta-De Anza Trail, Evora Bicycle/Pedestrian Road to Port Chicago Hwy
Delta-De Anza Trail, Port
Chicago Hwy to Iron Blcyde/Pedestrlan
Horse Trail
Pacifica Avenue Phase Ill : Bicycle/Pedestrian Pedestrian Facilities
Description Total Prvject Cost ProjiiCt Status
Provide a left turn lane at school $217,000 Not Begun
Safety Improvements along Morgan Territory $1,000,000 Not Begun Rd.
Install appropriate sized culverts under road $800,000 Not Begun for Kit fox crossing
Remove-covered by 4046 and 4049
Provide 4 lane widening $200,000,000 Not Begun
Widen to 4 travel lanes $5,800,000 Not Begun
Widen to four travel lanes $5,000,000 Not Begun
Widen to 4 travel lanes $9,000,000 Not Begun
Widen to 4 travel lanes $12,000,000 Not Begun
Safety Enhancement Project $3,600,000 Not Begun
Remove-same as 4049
Delete:
same as
3541
Provide traffic signal and tum lanes $600,000 Not Begun
Widen roadway along Marsh Creek Road east Under
of Russelmann Park Road $2,851,000 Construct!
on
Curve Realignment and road widening project Design $2,390,000 from 2.0 to 2.25 mi west of Deer Valley Road and ROW
Reconstruct, restrlpe, Intersection $600,000 Not
Improvements Begun
Widen to 4 travel lanes $3,450,000 Not
Begun
Delta Road: add dass 2 bike lane. $530,000 Not
Begun
Delta-De Anza Trail: construct aass I bikeway $500,000 Not
from Evora Road to Port Chicago Hwy Begun
Delta-De Anza Trail: construct Class I bikeway Not $1,500,000 from Port Chicago Hwy to Iron Horse Trail Begun
Provide sidewalks, curb ramps, and drainage
improvements along Pacifica Avenue $1,160,000 Not
between Driftwood Drive and Port Chicago Applicable
Highway
Primary
Sponsor
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
RTPC
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
I Project
~ ID
Project Name
Knightsen Pedestrian 3796 Project
3835 Delta Road Sidewalk and
Bike Lanes
Bailey Road Transit Access 3897 Improvement
Willow Lake Road 4053 Sidewalk Project
4055 Delta De Anza Trail Gap
Closure Bay Point
Driftwood Drive Bike 4186 Lanes
VIera Avenue Bike Lanes 4190 Project
Bailey Rd./SR 4
4280 Interchange Pedestrian &
Bicycle Improvement
Project
Lone Tree Way (Anderson
4389 Lane) bike lane gap
closure
4390 Main Street Sidewalk
4391 Holway Drive Safety
Improvements
4407 Gateway Road Sidewalk
Project
Project Type Description Total Project Cost Project Status
The purpose of this project is to replace the
sidewalk on Knightsen Avenue from the
Intersection with A Street to approximately
Bicycle/Pedestrian 200' south-east along Knightsen Avenue. $570,000 Complete
This project will construct approximately 220
linear feet of 8' wide sidewalk on Knightsen
Avenue and A Street.
Bicycle/Pedestrian Construct sidewalk and bike lanes on Delta $580,000 Not
Road Begun
Pedestrian crossing improvements to BART Not Bicycle/Pedestrian station including sidewalk widening and $2,197,506 Begun security lighting.
Construct sidewalk along the south side of
Willow Lake Road from Discovery Bay
Boulevard to Discovery Bay Elementary
Bicycle/Pedestrian School. Currently there is no sidewalk or path $232,000 complete
along the south side of Willow Lake Road
connecting the residents south of the road
with their school.
Install a 12-foot wide asphalt concrete bike
trail along the east side of Willow Pass Road
Bicycle/Pedestrian atthe location stated above. Stripe a bike $100,973 Complete lane on the west side of the road opposite
the AC path. Install bike lane signage and a
pedestrian barricade.
Install 4,300-foot long 5-foot bike lanes in
Bicycle/Pedestrian each direction of traffic, and improve $50,000 Complete
drainage inlet grates.
Widen Viera Avenue between East
Eighteenth Street and Wilbur Avenue to a 32
Bicycle/Pedestrian foot road width. This will provide 12 foot $746,000 Complete
travel lanes and 4 foot shoulders for Class II
bike lanes.
Interchange modifications to provide bicycle
Bicycle/Pedestrian and pedestrian improvements along Bailey $5,200,000 Design
Road.
Not Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide 4ft. wide class II bike lanes $1,300,000 Begun
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk, curb and gutter on the $200,000 Design
west side of Main Street, Byron and ROW
Bicycle/Pedestrian Connects sidewalks, curb ramps, and $390,000 Not
crosswalks. Begun
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk, curb and gutter on one $500,000 Not
side. Begun
Primary
Sponsor
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
RTPC
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
Project
10
4420
4421
4426
4462
446S
4468
4470
4471
4520
4183
3502
ADD
ADD
ADD
Project Name
Knightsen Ave. onto Delta
Rd Pedestrian Project
Delta Road Sidewalk
Project
Kirker Pass Road Bicycle
Project
Trail improvements In Bay
Point
Pacifica Avenue Sidewalk
Project
Bella Vista Neighborhood
Infrastructure
Improvements Project
Delta DeAnza Trail
Connection
Canal Road Bicycle and
Pedestrian Improvement
Program
Port Chicago
Highway/Willow Pass
Road Pedestrian & Bicycle
Improvement Project
Byron Vasco Connector
Project
Willow Pass
Beautification Project
Northern Waterfront
Good Movement
lnfr3structure
Willow Pass Rd at West
interchange at SR 4
wmow Pass Rd at Evora
at Willow Pass Ct
Project Type Description Total Project Cost Project Status
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk along Knightsen Avenue $450,000 Complete
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide sidewalk $400,000 Not
Begun
Bicycle/Pedestrian Provide class II bike lanes $S,OOO,OOO Not
Begun
Provide sidewalk along Driftwood Drive,
Steffa Street, and Tradewinds Court. Provide
trail from Beaulieu ct along the north into
parcel 098021030 to Beaulieu Court to Not Bicycle/Pedestrian Rapallo Lane to Waterview Place. Provide $2,600,000 Begun trail along the water canal from Mota Drive
to Willow Pass Road. Provide trail along the
creek from Pacifica Avenue to Riverside
Drive.
Provide sidewalk along north side of Pacifica Under
Bicycle/Pedestrian Avenue $1,200,000 Construct!
on
Not Bicycle/Pedestrian Neighborhood Infrastructure Improvements $18,300,000 Begun
Bicycle/Pedestrian Upgrade trail connections in intersecting $150,000 Not
streets Begun
Provide sidewalk and bike lanes along Design Bicycle/Pedestrian segment of Canal Road $1,690,000 and ROW
The installation of bike lane, sidewalk, curb
and gutter, curb ramps, and a pedestrian Safe Routes to actuated flasher to increase safety for an $1,784,000 Design
School improved route to school, trail and transit in and ROW
a Community of Concern.
Study feasibility of alternatives for Not Study connectors between Byron and Vasco Road $14,0S2,000
as part of COD General Plan Amendment Begun
Install street trees along both sides of Willow Not nc Pass Road and within a landscaped median, $2,400,000
and add special pedestrian-scale lighting. Begun
TBD/ Not
Arteriai/Roadway/R TBD Study Phases TBD Bugun
(Study ail/Water Phase)
Arterial/Roadway Signalize EB and WB off·ramps $1,088,000 Not
Begun
Arterial/Roadway Add turn lanes $803,000 Not
Begun
Primary
Sponsor
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Redevelopmen
tAgency
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
RTPC
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
~P-~-~~-ea----P-~-~_ea __ N_a_m __ e ____________ ~-~-j-ed __ T_yp __ e~--DeM7i~io~----------~---Total Project Cost ~jed Status
ADD Willow Pass Rd at Bailey Artenai/Roadway Restripe to four ldnes $214,000 Not
Rd to Pittsburg City Limits Begun
ADD Willow Pass Rd at ArterialfRnadway Arirt tum lan~• $1 ,058,000 Not
Intersection at Bailey Rd Begun
Port Chicago Highway-Not ADD Driftwood to West of Bicyde/Pedestrian Add shoulders and sidewalks $2,830,000 Begun McAvoy Rd
Port Chicago Highway-Not ADD -..•lc-;t c~ M:Avcr Rd tc Bic;de/Pede;;trian Re a!iin to :itandard:s with :iide·n·afU $1,404,000 Begun Pacifica Ave
Driftwood Dr -Port Not ADD Chicago Hwy to Pacifica Bicycle/Pedestrian Complete street with sidewalks $2,457,000 Begun Ave
Pacifica Ave -Port Not ADD Chicago Hwy to Alves Arterial/Roadway Extend roadway $4,773,000 Begun Lane Ext
ADD Alves Lane Extension Arterial/Roadway Extend roadway Willow Pass Rd to Pacifica $4,516,000 Not
Ave Ext Begun
ADD Bailey Rd · Canal Rd to $7,140,000 Not
BART Begu'l
ADD Loftus Rd · Canal Rd to Bicycle/Pedestrian Complete street with sidewalk $1.873,000 Not
Willow Pass Rd Begun
ADD Bethel Island Rd Wells Arterial/Roadway Add Shoulders $512,000 Not
Rd to Sandmound Blvd Begun
l'rimary
Sponsor
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
RTPC
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PIAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PIAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PIAN
TRANSPLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANS PLAN
TRANSPLAN
I
Proj ect
ID Project Name Project Type Description Total Project Cost Project Status Primary
Spans« RTPC
'-----------------------------·----·--------------------'
ADD Sandmound Blvd -Oakley Arterial/Roadway Add Shoulders $799,000 Not Contra Costa TRANSPLAN City tim it> to MJroner Rd Begun County
ADD Sandmound Blvd-1\rterl af/Ro~dway Add Shoulders $2 ,62'1,000 Not Contra Costa TRANSPLAN
Mariner Rd to Cypress Rd Segun Lounty
ADD Gateway Rd -Bethel Ar:eriai/Roadway Add Shoulders $1.690,000 Not Contra Costa TRANS PLAN Island Rd to Piper Rd Begun County
ADD Piper Ra -Gateway Rd to Arterial/Roadway Add Shoulders $1,293,000 Not Contra Costa TRANS PLAN
WillowRd Begun County
ADD Discovery Bay Blvd Arterial/Roadway Modify signal timing $60.000 Not Contra Costa TRANSPLAN Intersection with SR-4 Begun County
Discovery Bay Blvd Convert Intersection to all-way stop-Not Contra Costa ADD Intersection with Clipper Arterial/Roadway control!ed $90,000 Begun County TRANSPLAN
Drive
ADD SR-4 between Newport Dr Bicycle/Pedestrian Widen roadway and improve bicycle facilities $450,000 Not Contra Costa TRANSPLAN
and Discovery Bay Blvd Begun County
ADD SR-4 Intersection with Arterial/Roadway Add traffic signal $500,000 Not Contra Costa TRANS PLAN Newport Or Begun County
East Contra
Widen to 6 lanes, Laurel Road to Sand Creek Not Costa Regional
ADD SR4 Bypass, Segment 2 Freeway Road $38.000,000 Begun Fee and TRANSPLAN
Financins
Authority
East Contra
Widen to 41anes: Balfour Road to Marsh Not Costa Regional
ADD SR4 Bypass, Segment 3 Freeway Creek Road $38,000,000 Begun Fee and TRANSPLAN
Financing
Authority
Buchanan Road olr New 4-lane arterial (perhaps Z-lanes Buchal'lan Road Bypass Not ADD Arterial depending on studies) and Railroad Avenue $40,000,000 Pittsburg TRANSPLAN (currently known as to Sommersville Road, widen to 4-lanes Begun
James Donlan Extension I
ADD Neroly Road Arterial Oakley Road to Laurel Road, widen to 4-lanes $5,000,000 Not Contra Costa TRANS PLAN Begun County
I Project Project Name
~---
ADD Balfour Road Widening
SWAT·LAMORINDA PROJECTS
Repair Boulevard Way
3833 Bridge at Las Trampas
Creek
4386 Fish Ranch Road Safety
Improvements
2904 SR 24 Bikeway
SWAT· TRIVALLEY PROJECTS
2591 East Branch Road
Extension
Dougherty Rd.: Widen,
2606 Red Willow to Alameda
County
2991 Vasco Road Safety
Improvements, Phase 1
2992 Vasco Road Safety
Improvements, Phase 2
3206 Camino Tassajara Curve
Realignment
Camino Tassajara Road
3207 Widening: Windermere to
County Une
Stone Valley Road
3432 Improvements: High Eagle
to Roundhill Road
Stone Valley Road
3433 Improvements: Roundhill
Road to Glenwood Court
Miranda Avenue
3575 Widening and Curb
Project
4379 Miranda Avenue
Improvements
4380 Camino Tassajara
Improvements
4381 Nonris Canyon Road
Safety Improvements
Project Type Description Total Project Cost Project ltatus
Arterial W iden to 4 lanes: Deer Valley Road to $6.800.000 Not
Brentwood City Umits Begun
Repair of degraded Creek invert and armor Not Arterial/Roadway $444,000 the banks. Begun
Arterial/Roadway Safety Improvement, traffic calming $100,000 Not
measures Begun
SR 24 Bikeway: Unincorporated portions of
Bicycle/Pedestrian bikeway from Camino Pablo to Walnut Creek: $128,000 Not
Install destination, warning and traffic control Begun
signage; new bike lanes on Olympic Blvd.
Arterial/Roadway Construct 4lane arterial from Bollinger $14,000,000 Not
Canyon Road to Windemere Parkway Begun
Widen Dougherty road from 2 to 6lanes from Not Arterial/Roadway Red Willow Road to Alameda/Contra Costa $47,800,000 Begun border
Phase 1· Widen and construct a median
barrier approx two miles north of Contra
Costa/ Alameda County line to a pointthree
miles north of the County line (Approx. one
Arterial/Roadway mile In the Brushy Creek Area), with $43,300,000 Complete necessary striping, signing. left turn pockets
and barrier-end treatments. Also construct
along this stretch a southbound passing lane
with necessary widening of Brushy Creek
bridge.
Vasco Road Safety Improvements: realign
Arterial/Roadway roadway to improve sight distance, construct $15,000,000 Design
mead ian barrier, and add shoulders for 1.5 and ROW
mile segment.
Realign S-curve located halfway between
Arterial/Roadway Highland Road and the Alameda county line; $2,748,000 Design
includes widening to rural road, 55-mph and ROW
design standard.
Widen to 4lanes including 8-foot paved Not Arterial/Roadway shoulders and Class II bike lanes in both $12,500,000 Begun directions.
Widen the roadway on Stone Valley Road to Not Arterial/Roadway provide two 12-foot travel lanes and asphalt $127,000 Begun concrete shoulders.
Widen the roadway to provide two 12-foot Not Arterial/Roadway $1,023,000 travel lanes and two 5-foot Class II bike lanes. Begun
Construct pavement widening and curbs on Not Arterial/Roadway $392,000 each side. Begun
Remove-same as 4413
Arterial/Roadway Provide 32' Pavement sections and curb and $392,000 Not
gutter. Begun
Arterial/Roadway Provide 6 lane highway standard. $1,170,000 Not
Begun
Arterial/Roadway Safety and capacity improvements $4,500,000 Not
Begun
Primary
Sponsor
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
Contra Costa
County
RTPC
TRANSPlAN
SWAT/Lamorinda
SWAT/Lamorinda
SWAT/Lamorinda
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
SWAT/TVTC
._P-ro_l~-ect--P-ro-ject--N-am_e----~-=-=~ect~Ty_p_e __ Des~·-·pt-io_n __ _
Total Project Cost Project Status Pnm~ Sponsor RTPC
Signal & Traffic Management
Walkabillty audits and other non-
Infrastructure type of education and parent-
student surveys and then installed
improvements such as painting bike lanes
Countywide Safe Routes green or switching out ped crossings to Not Contra Costa Countywide
ADD Bicycle/Pedestrian include a countdown rather than a flashing $700,000 to School Program hand OR proposed sidewalk gap closure Begun County
primarily at one school site but coupled it
with education efforts at all city schools and
then included all pedestrian collisions
throughout the City In their B/C ratio
ADD Coutywide Mobility Bicycle/Pedestrian Evaluation of current pedestrian facilities for $400,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Improvement Program ADA accessibility Begun County
Annual Polymer Modified Maintenance-Apply polymer modified asphalt emulsion Arterial, Collector Not Countra Costa Countywide
ADD Asphalt Emulsion Double and Residential double chip seal to various unincorporated $54,000,000 Begun County Chip Seal Project Roads County roads
Annual Polymer Modified Maintenance-Apply polymer modified asphalt emulsion
ADD Asphalt Emulsion Single Arterial, Collector single chip seal to various unincorporated $30,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Chip Seal Project and Residential County roads Begun County
Roads
Maintenance-
ADD Annual Slurry Seal Project Arterial, Collector Apply slurry seal to various unincorporated $42,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
and Residential County roads Begun County
Roads
Maintenance-
ADD Annual Micro-Surfacing Arterial, Collector Apply micro-surfacing to various $20,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Project and Residential unincorporated County roads Begun County
Roads
Maintenance-
ADD Annual Asphalt Rubber Arterial, Collector Apply asphalt rubber cape seal to various $140,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Cape Seal Project and Residential unincorporated County roads Begun County
Roads
ADD Annual Asphalt Overlay Maintenance-Overlay selected unicorporated County $14,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Project Arterial Roads arterial roads Begun County
ADD Annual Asphalt Overlay Maintenance-Overlay selected unicorporated County $46,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Project Collector Roads collector roads Begun County
ADD Annual Asphalt Overlay Maintenance-Overlay selected unlcorporated County $80,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Project Residential Roads residential roads Begun County
ADD Annual Reconstruction Maintenance-Reconstruction of selected unlcorporated $14,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Project Arterial Roads County arterial roads Begun County
ADD Annual Reconstruction Maintenance-Reconstruction of selected unicorporated $30,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Project Collector Roads County collector roads Begun County
ADD Annual Reconstruction Maintenance-Reconstruction of selected unlcorporated $40,000,000 Not Countra Costa Countywide
Project Residential Roads County residential roads Begun County
TRANSPAC PROGRAMS
Iron Horse Trail Signage: install signage for
bicyclists and pedestrians along the entire Under Contra Costa 2624 Iron Horse Trail Signage Bicycle/Pedestrian length of the Iron Horse Trail that is within $300,000 Construct! County TRANS PAC
the County-owned former railroad right-of-on
way
g:\transportatlon\2014ctpupdate\draft ctp comments due sept 27 2014\cptl_comments_draft_final.docx
Staff Report
Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
Date: November 24, 2014
Subject Comments on the 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan
Summary of Issues The Authority released the Draft 2014 Countywide
Transportation Plan (CTP) in July 2014 and comments on the
Draft CTP were due on November 3. Staff will report on
comments received during the public review of the draft plan.
Recommendations Information only
Financial
Implications
The CTP, when adopted, will form the blueprint for the
Transportation Expenditure Plan which will outline the
Authority’s funding priorities
Options
Attachments A. “Big ideas” from online tool
B. Comments made at public meetings
C. Summary of letter received
The Authority released the Draft 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP) in July 2014
and comments on the Draft CTP were due on November 3. During the comment period,
the Authority provided a number of ways to comment besides formal letters:
Five public workshops were held in Walnut Creek, Pittsburg, Lafayette, Richmond
and Hercules
A telephone town hall allowed the public to call in to ask questions of Authority
staff
An online survey asked people for their transportation priorities and “big ideas”
People could also fill out a paper survey on their priorities and ideas
4-1
Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
November 24, 2014
Page 2
Staff is still compiling the responses made at the public workshops and through the
telephone town hall and paper surveys. We have attached information from the online
town and a summary of the letters received so far.
Online Tool
The Authority received about 350 “big ideas” and transportation priorities from about
200 people. The two following tables include a preliminary summary of the “big ideas”
proposed and transportation priorities that respondents identified. In both,
improvements to BART were the definite focus of comments. Of the big ideas, 93 related
to BART followed by buses (81) and bicycles (60). BART also got 122 priority votes —
everyone got to vote for three — followed again by bicycles (95) and buses (77).
The most “liked” big ideas identified through the online tool appears to be the extension
of BART (or some other form of fixed rail transit) between Walnut Creek and Dublin with
a substantial number of comments recommending the extension of BART to Hercules
and beyond.
“Big Ideas” from Online Tool — Preliminary Tally
Big Idea Categories Number of Ideas
BART 93
Buses 81
Bicycle 60
Local streets 29
Highways 22
Ferries 21
Pedestrian 15
Carpool-Rideshare 11
Other 9
Safe Routes to Schools 5
Programs for Seniors and People with Disabilities 1
347
4-2
Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
November 24, 2014
Page 3
Priorities from Online Tool — Preliminary Tally
Transportation Priorities Number of Votes
BART 122
Bicycle 95
Buses 77
Pedestrian 52
Local Streets 45
Ferries 42
Highways 40
Programs for Seniors and People with Disabilities 25
Safe Routes to Schools 22
Carpool/ Rideshare 10
530
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
Commentors expressed significant support for both bicycling and walking, especially
bicycling. Bicycling had the second highest priority of the ten possible choices and
pedestrian concerns had the fourth highest priority.
The “big ideas” identified ranged from the general — bicycle and pedestrian
improvements are needed — to calls for specific kinds of improvements, such as more
bicycle parking, and finally to improvements at specific locations. Those latter included a
bicycle-pedestrian bridge on the Iron Horse Trail over Monument Boulevard to new
bicycle lanes on Diablo Road in Alamo. The attached “big ideas” gives the complete list
of suggestions received through the online tool.
Public Workshop and Survey Comments
Comments made at the five public workshops mirrored comments the “big ideas”
identified through the online tool. They ranged from concern about congestion on
freeways and major arterials to support for expanded transit, especially along I-680 and
in West County, and from support for extending, connecting, and widening bicycle and
pedestrian facilities throughout the county (especially along major trails) to support for
improved bus service and safe routes to school.
4-3
Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
November 24, 2014
Page 4
Because the concerns expressed in the workshops varied so much, it is hard to identify
one theme that rose above others. Support for improved or expanded rail transit, bicycle
(and, to a lesser extent, pedestrian) facilities, and better bus service was mentioned a bit
more frequently than other modes, as they were in the online tool. Requests for
smoother vehicular movement, however, including through new technology, were also
made frequently at the workshops.
The attached list of comments is not complete. While it includes many of the paper
surveys that the Authority received back, some remain to be compiled. In addition, the
attachment doesn’t include a compilation of the comments received by telephone or
email.
Letters
The letters received ranged widely in the concerns expressed. Among the 29 letters
received, several jurisdictions wrote in to ask that the Authority increase funding for
maintaining local streets as well as to add to and refine the list of projects in Volume 3 of
the CTP. The Sierra Club, Greenbelt Alliance and TRANSDEF wrote to ask that the
Authority focus more in the CTP on addressing climate change. Bike East Bay
recommended transit improvements and better bicycle and pedestrian access to transit.
Caltrans wrote to support mitigation programs to address impacts on the regional
transportation network and to ask for a greater emphasis on goods movement. BART
and AC Transit both identified specific needs for their systems. The East Bay Leadership
Council asked for enhanced, multi-modal connectivity on the I-680 Corridor and
supported the use of new technologies in transportation.
4-4
Comments on CTP from Online Tool
Idea Title Idea Likes
BART
Build BART Connect Walnut Creek to Dublin. 34
Light Rail along
existing Ygnacio
Valley Road Median?
Sounds crazy, I know. But you know what else is crazy? How congested
this notorious stretch of road from Concord to Downtown Walnut Creek
has become - now at all times of the day. Let's look more into the true
purpose of building a light rail network along YV Road. For starters, what
purpose would it serve? My initial thought: to shuttle commuters to and
from nearby BART Stations (i.e, Walnut Creek/Pleasant Hill BART). If not
this, then what? Turn YV Road into a double-decker freeway? Build
another thoroughfare somewhere else to add a third alternative (the
second currently being Treat Boulevard)? Something WILL have to be
done within the next 10 years - there's no question about it. I'd love to see
this discussed with more intent sooner versus later. CCTA, are you
listening?
20
BART & 680 I'd like to see BART extended down the 680 corridor. San Ramon has a
major regional employment center and a BART extension would
significantly help to reduce traffic, congestion, emissions, and greenhouse
gases.
19
Late BART People like to go out on Friday & Saturday nights, but BART is not
reasonable transportation, because it shuts down before the
entertainment venues close. BART should run until at least 2:30 am on
weekend nights. It would be helpful to have more security in BART after
11 pm as well.
14
BART express trains Start an express train rout on BART similar to that of the New York
Subway system. This way people traveling from Contra Costa county could
get to Oakland and San Francisco quicker without having to stop at every
stop along the way. These trains could be made available during
commuter hours only. This would improve BART's efficiency and make
BART a more attractive form of transportation to many more people. This
will cut down commute time allowing people to get to work and get
home quicker, enabling them to spend more time with their families.
9
BART Capacity Run express trains to San Francisco
More cars on trains (9 cars is not good during commute)
Build new BART line from Walnut Creek through Danville, San Ramon,
Dublin
9
BART To West
Contra Costa County
The Pinole/Hercules area really needs a BART station. We paid for BART all
these years through our taxes, but all we got was BART ending in a little
stump in Richmond. And no plans to extend further. Richmond station, El
Cerrito del Norte and Orinda do not service our area well. We need our
own station. AC transit is limited and overcrowded, so it's not really an
alternative.
9
BART Extension In
West CCC
Extend Bart to Hercules 7
4-5
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 2
Idea Title Idea Likes
Light Rail or Bart
from WC to Dublin
Many have said it before, but a light rail system or bart extension from
WC to Dublin would greatly reduce congestion on 680. If I had that
option, I'd ride BART every day to work. The bus options are just too
inconvenient.
6
BART connection
between Dublin and
Walnut Creek
Install small train extension like the one to the Oakland Airport down the
680 corridor in the center of the freeway with stations in San Ramon and
Danville
6
680 Light Rail We need a light rail connects south and north Contra Costa county. 5
More BART Trains The SF/Pittsburg Bay Point line is always jam-packed during the morning
and evening commutes. Run trains more often (at least every five minutes
from 6:30-9am and again from 4:30-7pm) to reduce excessive crowding.
5
Improve Parking at
Orinda BART
Parking lot is full by 7:45 am most morning, you have over 2,000 people
wanting to pay for monthly permits. Why not create a 3 story parking
structure so everyone who wants to ride bart can. Raising the price of
parking every 6 months is a STUPID and POINTLESS idea. Why drive away
BART riders!
5
Bike Only BART Cars The rule change allowing bicycles on BART is great, but there are
continuously conflicts between bicycles and riders. Rider stand in the
bicycle priority area and cyclists block doorway. I propose the idea that
the last half of the last car on every BART train is designated for bicycles.
Remove seats and instead install angled stalls for bicycles to be tethered
to. This will keep cyclists at the end of the platform and away from other
riders while waiting, as well as put cyclists behind other riders as they exit
trains to leave the station.
4
BART down 680 to
San Ramon then
Pleasanton
You want to get the cars off the road, then go with BART where the cars
are going,..and make it cheaper.
4
BART extension to
Pinole, Hercules and
up possibly
I80 is the most congested freeway in the bay areas. The reason is the
housing are more affordable up there but people still need to work down
south. Why not expanding Bart to Crockett. Then establish a rapid bus
route running from Fairfield to Crockett. Currently, each city has its own
bus route. Why not combine those services. With that, you take away a lot
of traffic on the I80 and serving a whole lot of people.
4
Connect BART to
Hercules
Hercules is central to residents coming from across the Carquinez Bridge
and Highway 4. There are so many Hercules residents who commute to
Oakland and San Francisco, but face the daily burden of traffic. The drive
to El Cerrito Del Norte takes 30 minutes without carpool, so by that point,
you are already halfway to work. Bringing BART to Hercules would make
the lives of commuters so much easier, relieving the stress of citizens and
making the city a much happier place.
4
BART Parking It is crazy that sometimes people (myself included) don't use BART due to
parking and drive instead! MORE Bart parking (I use Lafayette statin, why
not multilevel parking WITH smart park that tells you if there are spots
available--should ANYone spend time LOOKING for unavailable parking?)
Thanks!!
4
Bart Extension How about Bart extension from Dublin to San Jose or Santa Clara. A lot of
employees are residing in Contra Costa, like San Ramon and yet working
in the Silicon Valley and vicinities.
3
4-6
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 3
Idea Title Idea Likes
BART for Hercules I know this was tried over a decade ago, and the ballot measure died in
Hercules, but I think the need still hasn't gone away. I'd like to see a study
conducted about how many cars would be removed from the roadways if
Hercules became home to a BART station.
I get the sense that many commuters in Richmond, Pinole, Hercules,
Rodeo, and Martinez would benefit from a BART station in Hercules.
I'm sure folks outside of Contra Costa (Solano County) would also benefit.
Thanks for your time.
3
Extend BART Extend BART to Brentwood, Martinez, Rodeo & connect Walnut Creek to
Dublin/Pleasanton.
3
BART extension
following Route 80
East
I have lived in Pinole for the past 14 years. It is clear that there is a
tremendous need to expand BART up route 80 from EL Cerrito Del Norte
to service the growing communities along that route:- San Pablo,
Pinole/Hercules, and El Sobrante.
This would reduce traffic along that busy corridor, and provide the
convenient transportation hubs that many other communities recently
added to the BART system now enjoy.
3
BART Extension in
West CCC
Extend Bart to Hercules 3
More Hours of BART Rework the BART budget to provide more frequent trains and more hours
of service
2
BART extension to
Brentwood and
Antioch
simple. 2
BART and eBART
station parking
Expansion of parking lots at BART stations is critical. If we want to get
more cars off the road we need to make BART a more viable option.
People will continue to skip taking BART if there aren't any places to park.
As for the new stations being constructed in East county they should just
start out by building bigger parking structures and doing it right from the
beginning. Also additional security at the parking lots will help cut back
on break ins. Police officers are not needed just maybe a security guard or
two. They are much cheaper and still provide a secure area for people to
leave their cars at during the day and overnight.
2
Light Rail in West
County to bart
Its obvious that most people who live in West County commute to SF
Oakland or Berkeley judging by the immense traffic that accumulates here
during rush hours. A fast Light Rail could alleviate this issue. Starting from
Rodeo to Richmond Bart/Amtrak station or to El Cerrtio bart stations. Also
have West Cat/AC transit stops correspond to the LRT stations and arrival
times. and have Plenty of Bike parking at the stops. It would go down San
Pablo ave to Bart via 23rd Street. Not only can this benefit commuters of
West County but also all the PVHS/HHS who live in Richmond/San Pablo
or tara hills get to school and all the students who live in Pinole/Hercules
get to Contra Costa College. Not only can alleviate traffic but it can
promote the use of bicycles and Peds, increase economic activity
especially in downtown Pinole/Rodeo and redevelopment of Downtown
Richmond 'waterfront' Hercules. Less Cars on the freeway more
bikes/Pedestrians more economic activity, convenience, less pollution. LRT
is the way to go. Its a win win situation!
2
BART on 680
Corridor
Make it happen 2
4-7
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 4
Idea Title Idea Likes
Light Rail Adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail along that terribly congested I680
corridor, long term provision for a Light Rail System, similar to that being
built to Brentwood, would make sense. I formerly commuted from Clayton
to San Ramon, and it was a driving nightmare, even when taking a bus.
"Light Rail" should have been listed in the choices to the left of this
screen. It's cheaper than BART and equally efficient.
2
Extend BART and
More WestCat JPX
Connect BART to Pinole or Hercules, Martinez. Have WestCat JPX runs
more often in afternoon hours, starting 3pm for every 15mins, Reinstate
the 4:01pm JPX from El Cerrito Bart to Hercules. Improve and maintain
the walk way from Hercules Transit Center to Sycamore Ave.
2
BART connecting
Concord, Walnut
Creek, San Ramon
and
Dublin/Pleasanton
This would greatly reduce congestion on 680 during commute times. San
Ramon and Walnut Creek are the predominant slow spots on my daily
commute.
2
Extend the
Richmond line
further north!
We in Pinole/Hercules would love to have a closer BART station to make
commuting back and forth to the inner East Bay easier and more fuel-
efficient. If a station were put in at Hilltop Mall, it might revitalize the mall
as well as making it easier for WCC commuters to make it to where they
have to go! Alternatively, the BART line could just move back to run
alongside Interstate 80 to a stop in Pinole/Hercules, minimizing additional
noise pollution for concerned residents.
2
Add Parking
Capacity at BART
stations
If parking was readily available at the Orinda and/or Lafayette BART
stations, I believe many more people would choose BART over driving.
Why not add plenty of parking at Orinda BART with a five-level parking
structure? It would be surrounded by Highway 24 and as such it would
not interfere with either half of Orinda's downtown. And with enough
monthly parking permits to satisfy demand, many commuters would be
able to start using BART on a regular basis. My idea is not only for riders
commuting to work, though. Occasional riders also need a way to get to
BART at all times of the day, and since buses aren't available, the only
choice is driving and parking.
2
BART Express Trains
from Orinda to San
Francisco
Build Tracks that would allow Express Trains from Orinda to San Francisco.
Express trains could use the existing Berkeley Hills Tunnel and then go on
separate tracks around Rockridge, MacArthur, and West Oakland Stations.
If new tracks were built from MacArthur along I-980 and along 7th Street
these express trains could bypass the Downtown Oakland Subway system
and cut 15 minutes off of commuters travel time to San Francisco. These
tracks could also be used to create express trains from the Ashby Station
to downtown San Francisco to shorten commute times from Richmond
and Berkeley as well. These tracks could also be built in conjunction with a
second Trans-Bay Tube out of Alameda.
2
Extend Bart to
Hercules
Extend Bart to Hercules and beyond 2
Expand parking
capacity at existing
BART stations
The biggest factor limiting use of BART is full parking lots for most of the
day. I believe building double-decker lots (e.g. at Orinda, Lafayette, and
Rockridge) would have outstanding ROI.
I would also favor the approach employed in Toronto and other cities with
great public transportation: charge more for parking at the train stations
and less for the train ride.
2
4-8
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 5
Idea Title Idea Likes
BART stations for
Hercules, Vallejo and
Fairfield
These areas need BART and bringing BART as an option for commuting
will help alleviate the horribly congested I-80 Freeway and help with air
quality.
2
W-BART - west
county passenger rail
extension needed for
transportation equity
in county.
W-BART - west county passenger rail extension needed for transportation
equity in county.
The western contra costa cities such as Richmond, San Pablo, Pinole,
Hercules and Rodeo/Crockett have not received the same degree of
attention as Central and Eastern county cities in terms of transportation
infrastructure and future investment. In the case of E-BART, for example,
construction is already underway and set to debut this decade -passenger
rail service extending all the way from Pittsburg through Antioch onto
Brentwood. However, Western Contra Costan cities along he I-80 corridor
experience some of the worst traffic not only in the state, but the entire
country. Many of these cities have maritime and industrial legacies from
the world war era (ie Shipyards Richmond, Herucles Dynomite, Refinery
Rodeo, C&H Crockett, etc) and existing infrastructure to improve on
within the urban core of Bay Area. It is important to consider that these
cities have been paying into the BART system tax since its inception in the
70's (far before many of the bedroom communities and tract housing
suburbanization of eastern contra costa occurred in the 90's). At the very
minimum- initial studies, EIR, and planning alongside BART & CCTA &
Union Pacific & BNSF for a western county extension of passenger rail
service is far long over due. Many of these western county cities are highly
transit reliant with much of our county's poverty being concentrated this
area. Expanded rail service would benefit this population and the region
greatly as I-80 becomes a parking lot as predicted by the MTC in the
decades to come. WETA / SF Bay Ferry has considered a ferry station in
Hercules, however, the dredging (combing back of the bay) needed in
such a shallow part of the Bay would exceed in costs tremendously.
Richmond, which already has a deep water port - should be prioritized for
Ferry service as the Craneway Pavillion (Ford Factory), Rosie the Riveter
National Park, Lawrence Berkeley National laboratory and Richmond
Marina districts are further developed in the Port / Ferry vicinity. Please
contact me for consultancy as my education is in urban geography and i
am a lifelong resident of western contra costa county
2
Walnut Creek to
Dublin Monorail,
NOT BART or e-Bart
Build a monorail, like the one in Seattle, up the middle of 680. A monorail
has a very small footprint, is elevated, and can be placed in the middle of
680 without widening the freeway. Monorails are good neighbors as they
are very quiet as opposed to noisy steel wheeled BART or e-Bart, both of
which require freeway widening, so the quality of life of the thousands
living next to 680 will not be damaged. Don't simply agree to "BART"
down 680, stand up for something much, much, better, a monorail for 680
corridor. (Google: Seattle monorail to get up to speed on it, theirs has
been operating successfully for 42 yrs.)
2
bart extensions bart extensions to east county 1
Express Trains on
BART
If we could build an additional track on BART that would act as an express
train from Embarcadero to Walnut Creek or Pleasant Hill, it could cut
people's commute times down by about 20 minutes. Imagine if you could
get from WC to SF in 15 minutes!
1
BART Extension Making BART more usable by forming a loop on the eastern portion down
680 from Walnut Creek to Dublin.
1
4-9
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 6
Idea Title Idea Likes
No buses Light rail is the solution. 1
BART extended BART station in Martinez, near County buildings and the Amtrak. Also:
Bart to Marin (San Rafael) and longer hours for the Airport, San Francisco,
East Bay lines. More trains during peak hours. in and out of San Francisco.
1
Reduce Congestion
of I-80
It's long overdue for BART to be extended to Crockett, through Solano
County and all the way to Sacramento. Imagine the cars filling up all the
BART parking lots along the route and the incredible reduction of
congestion on our I-80!
1
Transportation
Transformation -
BART!
I believe its time for BART to partner with ET3 development and assist in
research to acquire a BART/ET3 prototype for local BART applications. Its
more efficient all the way around.
1
Complete the 1956
BART Plan
I saw this 1956 BART plan online:
http://www.jakecoolidgecartography.com/regionalrapidtransit_bayarea.ht
ml
How great would it be to have a system like this?
1
Expand BART Extend BART from Walnut Creek to San Jose, through Dublin. 1
BART Stop making transportation policy with an aim towards forcing people to
act the way you want us to act; instead, respond to the way we have
chosen to live our lives. Give up the fantasy that people are going to ride
the bus to BART, and build more parking at the Walnut Creek BART
station.
1
Extend BART Extend BART to Brentwood, Martinez, Rodeo & connect Walnut Creek to
Dublin/Pleasanon.
1
Connect BART to
Hercules
Hercules is central to residents coming from across the Carquinez Bridge
and Highway 4. There are so many Hercules residents who commute to
Oakland and San Francisco, but face the daily burden of traffic. The drive
to El Cerrito Del Norte takes 30 minutes without carpool, so by that point,
you are already halfway to work. Bringing BART to Hercules would make
the lives of commuters so much easier, relieving the stress of citizens and
making the city a much happier place.
1
BART connecting
Concord, Walnut
Creek, San Ramon
and
Dublin/Pleasanton
This would greatly reduce congestion on 680 during commute times. San
Ramon and Walnut Creek are the predominant slow spots on my daily
commute.
1
BART EXTENSION IN
WEST CCC
Extend Bart to Hercules 1
All of CoCo County
needs BART and
AMTRAK!!!
Riding by Hercules on the Capitol Corridor train, or fighting the highway
traffic to Hercules is ridiculous! Please get us all off of the freeway and on
to reasonable train options. PLEASE ensure these train options allow bikes
for those of us needing a way to get home from the station. :)
1
Two Ideas to keep
the county moving
1. The simplest thing is to have the traffic lights on all major streets
computer controlled so their is minimal interruption to the main traffic
flow. Mt. Diablo in Lafayette is a good example of what not to do. There is
a lot of technology out there to make this simple improvement.
2. I feel that BART has been maximized. The county should now fill in with
light rail, tied into BART. Light rail is faster to build and significantly
cheaper. We could have connections, using the freeway system
throughout the county, particular on 4 to Brentwood, down the 680
1
4-10
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 7
Idea Title Idea Likes
corridor and out to Tracy to minimize 580 traffic. We could solve a lot of
these problems by using light rail (Sacramento, Portland are examples.
BART services early
Sunday and Saturday
Please provide services for people who have to work early hours Sunday
and Saturday, say around 5am.
1
Light rail connection
between walnut
creek and
Dublin/San Ramon
Need to alieve congestion on 680 by doing more than hov lanes.
Congestion is getting worse both north and south every year and the
commute timeframe getting larger( starting earlier and ending later).
Either light rail? Along 680 or need another north-south route in addition
to 680.
1
User Funded Projects This area has consistently teased it's commuters with Taxpayer-subsidized
transportation projects. It forces many citizens, including seniors on fixed
incomes, to subsidize younger, richer commuters with way below market
transportation fares.
Arguments claiming secondary benefits of Gov't mass transportation are
nothing but a smoke screen and attempt to guilt people into going along
with another costly and inefficient mass transportation project.
The Fourth Bore of the Caldicott Tunnel was a great idea that should have
been paid for with user fees (FASTRAK).
Well over 50% of BART operating expenses are subsidized by additional
taxes. Maybe if BART users were paying full fare, they might scrutinize the
waste and excessive salaries and benefits of BART employees.
The only fair answer to funding future transportation projects is to
institute User Fees to fully fund the projects.
1
Cost of BART I have quite a bit of experience riding the Metro in the DC area, and its
costs are significantly less than BART. Can you explain this? Further, The
Metro offers all-day tickets, which is great for people touring the area.
Why doesn't BART offer these?
1
4-11
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 8
Idea Title Idea Likes
Monorail from
Dublin to Walnut
Creek, up 680
Construct a monorail from West Dublin Bart station up the middle of 680
to Walnut Creek Bart station. Monorail would have intermediate stations
at San Ramon, Danville, and Alamo. Through San Ramon, the monorail
would jog East on Bollinger, North on Camino Ramon to service City
Center/Bishop Ranch, jog West on Crow Canyon then North along
centerline of 680. I have been thinking about the need for such a monorail
line for well over a year. Presently, even though 680 has been widened to
5 lanes, including a diamond lane, 680 frequently is stop/go/creeping in
the north direction and sometimes similar gridlock in the south direction,
so busses in the diamond lane are not the answer.
Since 680 is now frequently beyond its maximum capacity, and will only
get worse, the logical solution is to build a monorail, similar to the
monorail that runs from downtown Seattle to the Seattle center. A
monorail is the obvious choice for the 680 corridor because it has a small
footprint, and can be run up the center 680 without necessitating
widening the freeway. A monorail is supported by approx. 5ft. X 5ft.
concrete “T― columns that support two elevated approx. 100ft. long
pre-cast concrete beams/monorail tracks, one in each direction. The
monorail is quiet, having rubber tires running on smooth concrete, so it is
a good unobtrusive neighbor for local residents. On the other hand,
running Bart along this route, because of its much greater footprint,
would necessitate greatly widening 680, and since Bart uses steel wheels
on steel rails, a lot of noise is generated, making Bart a bad neighbor for
residents nearby. Running BART up 680 would be a disaster for the many
thousands of residents living near 680. Build a quiet low footprint
monorail instead!
1
Discounts and more
rides
Discount fare should be provide between 6AM-8:30AM and 4:00PM-6PM
as these are considered working and school commute times to incentive
people to use more public transportation. Bart, for example, is the most
expensive transportation I would risk to say in the nation
0
Fast Trains to
connect a city to
another.
Trains, BART system extension will be good. Please, no buses this only
increases the traffic . Buses is for third world country . Please good local
roads and trains , light rail . Thank you
0
shuttle bus extension There are shuttle buses from Pleasanton ending in Pleasant Hill.
How about having shuttle buses start in Brentwood & Antioch & Pittsburg
so that those of us who work in the Pleasanton area can get on board
earlier rather than having to ride the Bart into Pleasant Hill?
0
Bart to Antioch and
Brentwood
I move to CCC in 1996 and back then Bart said it would extend to Antioch.
When is that ever going to happen? Let's finish the project that were
supposed to happen first, and then look into making new things happen.
0
Discovery
Bay/Brentwood to
Livermore/Dublin
I would like you to consider a train or ebart system connecting Discovery
Bay/Brentwood and Livermore/Dublin. Also I think you should consider a
system like xMatters to communicate with people via SMS and push
notifications to alert commuters of major traffic issues on roads. The apps
available aren't specific enough.
0
BART operations,
management and
board need
replacement
With the recent history of accidents, strikes, management concessions to
union blackmail, technology obsolescence, it is time we replaced the BART
board, management and operating/maintenance staff with global
transportation firms expert in the economical operations and expansion of
transit systems. In addition, we need to employ the automation
technologies and systems upgrades that allow BART trains to run without
operators and in close proximity to each other to move riders
0
4-12
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 9
Idea Title Idea Likes
conveniently to more destinations.
Bart Extention Please work on a Bart extension through Livermore to Vasco -- through to
Mountain House, CA would be ideal ;-) There are no commuting
reasonable community options for Mountain House residents that don't
include back tracking at least 15 mins (ACE train), limited drop off points,
and many additional delays.
The majority of the people in Mountain House (which continues to grow)
are from the Bay Area and many still work in the Bay.
0
Feeder lots for BART No parking at the Lafayette or Orinda stations - and very
inconvenient/slow bus service. If there was a reliable, inexpensive shuttle
that picked up folks from a central location - like the always empty
weekday parking lots at a church and went direct to BART it would be
fantastic - cheap, easy and effective!!!!
0
BART Express Trains
from Orinda to San
Francisco
Build Tracks that would allow Express Trains from Orinda to San Francisco.
Express trains could use the existing Berkeley Hills Tunnel and then go on
separate tracks around Rockridge, MacArthur, and West Oakland Stations.
If new tracks were built from MacArthur along I-980 and along 7th Street
these express trains could bypass the Downtown Oakland Subway system
and cut 15 minutes off of commuters travel time to San Francisco. These
tracks could also be used to create express trains from the Ashby Station
to downtown San Francisco to shorten commute times from Richmond
and Berkeley as well. These tracks could also be built in conjunction with a
second Trans-Bay Tube out of Alameda.
0
Bart Connection Connect Concord-Martinez- Hercules to Richmond BART 0
W-BART - County
Wide Infrastructure
Spending Equality
The western contra costa cities such as Richmond, San Pablo, Pinole, and
Hercules have not received the same degree of attention as Central and
Eastern county cities in terms of transportation infrastructure and future
investment. In the case of E-BART, for example, construction is already
underway and set to debut this decade -passenger rail service extending
all the way from Pittsburg through Antioch onto Brentwood. However,
Western Contra Costan cities along he I-80 corridor experience some of
the worst traffic not only in the state, but the entire country. Many of
these cities have maritime and industrial legacies from the world war era
(ie Shipyards Richmond, Herucles Dynomite, Refinery Rodeo, C&H
Crockett, etc) and existing infrastructure to improve on within the urban
core of Bay Area. It is important to consider that these cities have been
paying into the BART system since its inception in the 70's (far before
many of the bedroom communities and tract housing suburbanization of
eastern contra costa occurred in the 90's). At the very minimum- initial
studies, EIR, and planning alongside BART & CCTA for a western county
extension of passenger rail service is far, far over due.
0
More local
commuter busses to
BART
I live near a BART station and parking is awful on weekdays. It would be
much better to have small local busses ferrying people to their
neighborhoods and reduce the congestion in my neighborhood. There
would be fewer cars and much less pollution. This would be greener and
safer.
0
Richmond Light Rail Construct at least (3) light rail lines in this order:
1. (4) stops: 1. North Richmond * 2. Harbour way x
0
4-13
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 10
Idea Title Idea Likes
McDonald(Bart/downtown Richmond) * 3. Harbour way x Cutting blvd. * 4.
Ford Point/Marina Bay Ferry Terminal
2. McDonald Avenue East to West. San Pablo ave to Richmond Blvd
3. San Pablo Ave. North/South connect to other cities
Build a Bart Station
in Pinole/ Hercules
We desperately need a Bart Station in the Pinole/Hercules area. The
Richmond Line needs to be extended down to at least the Carquinez
Bridge to ease the traffic down the I-80 corridor. The citizens of Contra
Costa County all pay taxes for Bart and it is time West Contra Costa
County have access to the system they have been paying for all these
years. A station could easily be built at the HWY 4 entrance where the bus
station currently exists. This idea is long overdue. We need easier access
to SF and we need to ease the traffic on I 80.
0
extend BART in west
county
Extend BART from richmond station to san pablo and hilltop using rumrill
boulevard to san pablo/el portal.
0
Irma The town forum was great even though there wasn't time for my question.
Great is also how I had planned to describe the ability to take the BART
from Walnut Creek to the SFO airport. It certainly is convenient and gets
many cars off the road. I have a lot of visitors, including quite a few from
other countries and they are often able to dismiss the need for a rental car
and its gas consumption and complexity, because of the convenience and
user-friendliness of BART.
However, there are many who arrive very late at night or have to leave
very early in the morning. Sometimes they would like to take a tour that
leaves from San Francisco on Sunday morning. If it is a commuter day, it
can probably be arranged, but on the weekend an expensive taxi or
airport limo may be the only recourse for getting across the Bay after
midnight or before 8 am, unless a friend takes them and goes one way
alone. Couldn't there be even one BART every two or three hours? That's
still not very convenient, but better than impossible.
0
Lucia T S Instead of using in CCC those big busses, change to shuttle busses, more
of them, more routes and more often
Keep Bart running Fr. Sat and Sun until 2:30, add more security and future
connection WC/Dublin
0
Bike Racks on BART In Portland, Oregon, there is public light rail called "MAX", they have bike
hooks from the ceiling that you can hook your bike on and then go sit
down. I really wish BART had ways to hang my bike up. The ability for
bikes to get in and out of BART is horrible.
0
Standing Room Only
Cars for BART
I would like during rush hour and during games, to have trains with a car
designed to be standing room only so more people can fit in. There is
nothing more annoying that during rush hour to have to wait at a station
for 2 trains to pass, all packed with people.
0
Expand the
BART/Capitol
Corridor Joint
Powers Authority
Expand the BART/Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority to create a new
rail line running on existing tracks from Stockton to Richmond
Amtrak/BART. Then, build in-fill stations in downtown Oakley, downtown
Pittsburg, Crocket and Hercules. This would provide direct/convenient
transit service between East Contra Costa and West Contra Costa. This
would have county-wide and regional wide benefits. For example, a
resident from east or west Contra Costa could conveniently get to county
offices in downtown Martinez. Also, this can help provide traffic relief in
Contra Costa from commuters driving from neighboring counties (for
0
4-14
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 11
Idea Title Idea Likes
example: Stockton/San Joaquin residents could have more service to
Richmond Bart from Stockton Amtrak; Vallejo/Solano residents could
board at a Crockett in-fill station and take cars off I-80).
Fixing BART Parking
Problems
Currently all BART parking lots are full during business hours. This forces
cars to park on the streets with restricted parking and people getting
tickets. From quick changes to those requiring more time to do:
1. Create additional spaces in red zones in the lots like what is done in
Orinda.
2. Removed those street restrictions. An example is at North Concord
where there is a long street accessing the lots with no parking signs.
3. Acquire the empty lots around the current lots and create more
parking. This can be done in Concord, North Concord, Pittsburg and
others. There is a lot of empty space around them.
0
Make maximum use
of pre-existing
infrastructure
And try NOT to tear down what we do have! I.E. Stop pulling up every
abandoned rail line or spur or converting them to hiking paths, before
one has eliminated ANY possibility that it could be needed for future mass
transit/passenger rail uses/expansion.
A good example is to rehabilitate the old rail thru the Concord Naval
Weapons Station from the Amtrak line to the BART North Concord
station. Since the city of Concord is looking to redevelop this large tract of
land, it would be ideal to get the mass transit into place and get all
construction work out of the way before development limits our options.
Second, since BART already makes regular unscheduled stops at the BART
Concord Yard to drop off BART personnel, one might as well make it a
formal stop. Right now, in the aftermath of last year's BART strike, this
stopping of regular service for passengers to do a service that only applies
to BART personnel only rubs salt into an old wound. There is a substantial,
moderately-dense, residential population immediately adjacent to the
East of the yard in the form of 2 or 3 massive trailer parks and a number
of apartment complexes. Then on the opposite side of the yard is the
Concord Costco. So there is clearly something to serve at that location.
After all, if they are stopping there anyway, and making people wait to get
home after a long day, for goodness sake, make the stop worthwhile for
EVERYONE!
0
Bart - e services We have lived in Antioch for 19 years as home owners. We have paid
many times over for the BART extensions that were promised. Now we
hear we get eBART instead. This is not what we paid for and we are
frustrated with all the years of other areas receiving BART instead of us.
How is eBART equitable for all we have paid in to this program?
0
BART via 680 Please, please, PLEASE build BART down 680! The San Ramon Valley is the
last area of Contra Costa that needs BART, and all 120,000 of us are
stranded out here as the congestion worsens every day!
Just please connect the Walnut Creek and Dublin/Pleasanton Stations via
680! It should even go farther south to Silicon Valley.
This new BART extension would be very useful in moving people from
Central Contra Costa to work in the San Ramon Valley, and for moving
San Ramon Valley residents to Silicon Valley and San Francisco.
0
4-15
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 12
Idea Title Idea Likes
Do Not Run Nearly
Empty Busses in San
Ramon
Over the last more than several years, the CCTA busses operating in/out
of San Ramon are almost always nearly empty. Quit trying to social
engineer us, we do not want busses and we do not want busses operating
on the 680 diamond lanes during commute hours in diamond lane traffic
that is creeping along or stop and go either. This is simply wasting our tax
money.
0
MORE BART
PARKING
The extreme lack of BART parking simply pushes more cars (like mine)
onto the freeways and bridges during rush hours.
0
Beware, What CCTA
Really Means by
"BART down 680"
From a recent email exchange with a representative of CCTA, "BART down
680" does not necessarily mean that; CCTA uses that term because most
voters would "understand that" (are you voters out there really that
uneducated---CCTA certainly thinks so.). It could mean light rail, eBart
(diesel powered & noisy steel rails), or something else unspecified, AND it
does not mean a rail connection from Walnut Creek BART to Dublin BART.
CCTA is referring to some kind of unspecified system that would run from
somewhere in WC to the north border of San Ramon!, likely with some
kind of shuttle busses at each end, an not to Dublin BART.
We need a complete system, WC BART to Dublin BART, and not
something with noisy steel wheels squealing on steel rails, or diesel
powered, that would devastate the quality of life for the thousands living
near the 680 corridor. We need a proven, low noise, low footprint
monorail, like in Seattle. People, you need to hold CCTA accountable &
not settle for mediocrity.
0
Put a new BART
Station at the
Concord BART Yard
Many BART trains now already regularly or semi-regularly stopping at the
Concord yard to drop-off BART Employees. If they are going to stop
anyway, why not make it a regular BART station? On one side is the
Concord Costco and on the other is the semi-densely populated area of
several very large mobile home parks and several apartment complexes.
All within easy walking distance. There is certainly a population and
commercial district that can be serviced here, not just BART employees.
0
Richmond-SF
Express Bus
Bring back the express bus between Richmond and SF. It made getting to
San Francisco so easy. No need to drive to BART and park. No need to
hassle with getting into the BART station. Just get on the bus and go!
0
Make AMTRAK
affordable for
commuters.
Many tech workers would like to take the train to Emeryville, but the cost
is prohibitive. Negotiate a commuter rate for people taking short trips.
0
New Bart Line Along
680 connecting
Dublin, Walnut Creek
680 highway is really congested between Dublin and Walnut Creek; it
would be great to have a Bart line that goes along 680, maybe between
the directions (like highway 24 Lafayette, Orinda). The new line could run
north south, from Benicia/ Martinez, through Walnut Creek station, stop in
Danville & San Ramon (Bishop Ranch), then connect with Dublin station,
and maybe continue south as population / traffic dictate.
0
More BART Have later trains on weekends, and extend the line to San Jose Diridon
station.
0
4-16
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 13
Idea Title Idea Likes
Parking Structure in
Orinda
The Orinda Bart Parking lot is full weekday mornings by 7:30 which makes
it impossible for drivers wanting to use BART after that hour to park. The
enormous black topped area is a terrible use of valuable downtown land
when building a parking structure would be much more efficient and
enable casual users and folks that use BART anytime after 7:30 to be
accommodated. A parking structure, like the one planned for Walnut
Creek, will also relieve downtown Orinda of a problematic parking
situation as it struggles with BART parking on the streets of the downtown
and nearby neighborhoods. Better parking at BART will create more
ridership and a more environmentally friendly situation for all.
0
BICYCLE
Treat the Iron Horse
Trail as a
Thoroughfare
As traffic on our highways and city streets has increased, more and more
of us are using the Iron Horse Trail as a key thoroughfare, replacing some
of our driving with foot and bicycle traffic. The Trail's not just for
recreation anymore, in other words. Let's start treating it as part of our
transportation system by patching and enhancing the pathway, and
ideally by splitting the pedestrian and bicycle traffic a bit more for the
safety of all.
35
Connect and sign
bike paths
There are lots of bike paths on CA (not enough, but lots) In Portland they
have direction signs. Here we often have to guess how the end of on path
connects to the next. How about some signs?
14
Separated bike lanes
among major roads
to BART
Byways or separate bike lanes along major roads to BART stations will
increase/encourage bike ridership and reduce traffic, especially the
craziness along Clayton road. Currently it's a death trap for cyclists.
10
Make downtown
Walnut Creek more
pedestrian and bike
friendly
Make downtown Walnut Creek more pedestrian friendly by encouraging
cars to use the ring roads around the city (California, Newell, Broadway
and Civic) and not drive through downtown.
Narrow Mt Diablo Blvd between California and Broadway to one lane each
way and add sidewalk cafes and a bike path to allow people to bike
through the downtown – and link this bike path to the Iron Horse Trail
and the proposed Olympic Corridor cycle path.
9
better county and
city bile/pedestrian
path connections
I’ve had two major bicycle accidents in the City of Concord on non-bike
friendly roadways. The first, 2 years ago caused me such grief that I didn't
ride a bike again for a whole year. Then came the Monument Corridor... I
want city developers to take a seat in the ride of the BART rider, bus goer,
bike rider and foot pedestrian before they make decisions that are life
costly to the ones who depend and utilize these methods of transport.
8
Bike Lanes MORE OF THEM 8
YVR Bikelane A bike lane on Ygnacio Valley road would encourage ridership to
Bart/downtown by taking people out of their cars and freeing up traffic.
As it stands now, the sidewalk isn't conducive to ride as well as not even
having a viable sidewalk from John Muir down to Heather Farms on the
sound side of the road.
7
Better Bike Link
Between Iron Horse
and Lafayette
Going through downtown Walnut Creek on a bike is a drag - and
dangerous. There has to be a way to extend the Iron Horse to Olympic or
some other east/west bike route passing through Lafayette and Orinda,
etc.
6
More Bike Riders First of all cars who honk their horns at bike riders should be shot. We
aren't doing anything wrong, there just aren't enough bike lanes,
including right in front of the Oakley Police Station. I ride my bike on most
5
4-17
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 14
Idea Title Idea Likes
days to work, it's not only good for your body, but saves on gas. Since the
end of a May, I've only filled up my 2005 VW four times. It seems to me,
that if there were more bike riders, it would cut down on the car
congestion, save gas money, to buy food and supplies, and we wouldn't
have do many health problems due to our sedentary ways. There are
MANY roads in and around Oakley, Brentwood, and Sntioch, whete I do
the majority if my bike riding, that don't have bike lanes.
Extend Delta de Anza
bike trail west
I recently pedaled my bike from my home in Antioch to my job as
ferryboat captain in Vallejo. I cycled west on the Delta de Anza bike path
until it abruptly ends at the junction of highway 4 and Willow Pass road.
My options were to either go on a busy two lane 50mph road with no
shoulder, or pedal on the shoulder of the freeway. I would love to see the
bike path extended to give people a much safer alternative for cycling
over that hill.
5
Just another reason
for Bike Lanes
Today, I attempted to ride from Oakley, to Antioch, via 18th street,
returning on Lone Tree Way. My first encounter with a vehicle, was a Mail
van. The driver pulled right in front of me. I was going about 12 mph and
it took quite a lot of force to stop my bike. I ended up jumping the curb,
to avoid the collision. Again, on 18th street, a vehicle pulled out in front of
me, not even looking in my direction, just came barreling out of a
driveway. The third time I was almost hit, dead on, by someone who
pulled what is called a rolling stop. He/she didn't stop, and I was
approaching the curb, from the cross walk. On my right, there was this
fairly good sized median, with dead crepe myrtles, weeds and trash. If the
median had not been placed as it was, there would have been a bike lane.
The list goes on, and I won't bore the reader with the details, but I was
able to arrive home with no scratches. The lack of proper bike lanes is
pathetic in the Brentwood/Oakley and Antioch area.. My bike is my main
form of transportation, Is it going to take some one getting seriously hurt,
or possibly killed for the Cities to do something????
4
The future is bicycles Protected bike lanes on busy streets. 3
Maintain Contra
Costa Canal Trail
Boy, bike riding on the CCCT is great, but boy there are some bumpy
parts. Can we flatten those out?
3
Pinehurst Road -
Moraga to Oakland.
Bikers need a safe way to ride up Pinehurst to Skyline. The corners are
blind and the street is very narrow. It's a very popular and very dangerous
route right now.
3
Connect Lafayette to
Walnut Creek via
Bike
Olympic Rd in Lafayette goes right on through to Walnut Creek-- but the
bike lane is narrow and the street is fast and busy. How about a separated
path (like there is in a section of it) for cyclists, and it would be great to
just connect the Lafayette-Moraga trail to the Ironhorse Trail (in Walnut
Creek) for pedestrians and cyclists.
3
Make Lafayette
Downtown More
Bike Friendly
Downtown Lafayette, on Mt. Diablo Blvd, has the cyclists sharing the main
road lane with cars. How about moving all the metered parking to off-
street lots and making a proper bike lane with a divider (like SF has done
with their green lanes)?
3
Extend Delta de Anza
bike trail west
I recently pedaled my bike from my home in Antioch to my job as
ferryboat captain in Vallejo. I cycled west on the Delta de Anza bike path
until it abruptly ends at the junction of highway 4 and Willow Pass road.
My options were to either go on a busy two lane 50mph road with no
shoulder, or pedal on the shoulder of the freeway. I would love to see the
bike path extended to give people a much safer alternative for cycling
2
4-18
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 15
Idea Title Idea Likes
over that hill.
Clear gravel/debris
from & review road
surfaces in Bike
Lanes
If the intention is for cyclists to use bike lanes, then the road surfaces in
them need to be debris, pothole and crack free. Obstacles and/or a badly
surfaced bike lane means cyclists can fall/be injured or will need to move
over into the roadway, creating unnecessary friction between motorists
(who can't see that the path surface is unrideable) who see an "empty bike
lane" and a rider in their way.
2
Bike lanes and buses
to a bike friendly
BART
Easy access to buses with frequent runs to BART and safe bike lanes that
connect the rider to BART. Bike routes are dicey. Trails are the best but
currently are used mostly for recreation because they don't go to transit
centers or shopping areas.
2
Safe Bike Path from
Discovery Bay/Byron
to Brentwood
Please consider safe bike and pedestrian routes from Discovery Bay to
Brentwood (Liberty HS) and Byron (Excelsior Middle School). We have
already had 1 young man killed on a bicycle on his way to school (2013). It
would reduce car traffic considerably if there was a safe alternative for our
kids (and adults) to travel between these towns. The roads are all rural
with no shoulders. PLEASE look into improving at least one route to
prevent another tragedy.
2
Bike lanes on San
Pablo Dam Road
The I-80 Bikeway is the flattest, easiest bike route between east and west
county, but the lack of bike lanes or protected infrastructure makes it
unsafe and unappealing for all but the most experienced road bicyclists. A
full, protected bike lane from El Cerrito through El Sobrante (Key, Amador,
San Pablo Dam Road to where the bike lanes start at Castro Ranch Road)
would be a huge improvement.
2
Bicycle Bridge the Iron Horse bike trail over Monument Blvd. just as was done at
Ygnacio and Treat. Bike Bridges shouldn't just be for the wealthy.
2
Bicycle Routes To increase use of bicycles a network of continuous and traffic free routes
and trails are desirable. Where possible, use separated rights of way,
otherwise quiet, suburban streets could avoid entanglements with heavy
traffic. Some access would be needed to make continuous routs where
suburban streets are not so.
1
Bike LANES Yes, more bike lanes marked on surface streets; along with stop signage
or warning signs.
1
powered two-
wheelers...
--------- 1/4 the parking demands . . .
1/2 the gas use . . .
1/8 the wear and tear on roads . . .
always can get through the SUV-caused jams . . .
1
Prioritize bikes Let’s arrange the infrastructure for bikes , so that kids can ride their
bikes, people can shop and get to BART on BIKES without interacting
with cars Dedicated bicycle lanes down Gregory Lane in PH with bridges
or Tunnels through down town and past the Freeway to get to BART and
the bike path.
Yes it will inconvenience the cars, but in actuality will only cost them may
be 5 more minutes to get from Contra Cost Blvd to PH road.
If it is separate from cars then fewer people will be in cars, because they
1
4-19
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 16
Idea Title Idea Likes
will be on bikes.
Bike centered
transportation
Whether commuting to work, school, BART, or running daily errands,
biking could be a major mode of transportation if we had safe bike lanes
and bike-only routes. In Concord for instance, you're taking your life in
your hands to ride most of our busy streets.
1
Get Bikes off Ygnacio
Valley Road
YVR is a very busy, very important roadway, and there is not enough room
for bicyclists in the right lane. It makes no sense to "share the road" on
YVR, it slows traffic for everyone. On at least that roadway, bikes belong
on the sidewalk. Bicyclists on YVR slow traffic in all lanes because of the
lane changes necessary to pass them, and all the lane changes increase
the risk of accidents as well.
1
More signs with pre-
planned bike routes
I have seen a couple of signs on the Iron Horse trail in Pleasant Hill and
Lafayette that contain common destinations and arrows pointing towards
the bike route to take to reach them.
I think this helps potential bike commuters out a lot as it not only gives
you ideas on how to get where you want, but it also gives you reassurance
that the route that you're being sent on has been vetted to be safe for
bikes.
1
Safe crossings of the
Hwy 4 Bypass
It is dangerous to use the sidewalk at Lone Tree Way to get across the
bypass. The motorists are not thinking about pedestrians or bicyclists as
they get on and off the freeway. It is especially dangerous to use the
crosswalks across the freeway on ramps, because the cars do not stop
when the pedestrians are trying to cross.
The Hwy 4 Bypass severed what is now Old Sand Creek Road. A bicycle
and pedestrian underpass could be placed under the bridge here to
restore this connection between Brentwood and Antioch.
1
Bike East-Way
Routes
Currently we have trails that travel north-south directions but nothing that
connects the east-west, in fact, it is really dangerous to travel on the roads
by bicycle in the east-west direction. We need either trails or
bike/pedestrian safe lanes that protect from vehicles to connect the
Contra Costa Canal Trail to the Iron Horse Trail.
1
BART Bicycle
Hanging Posts
In Portland, the MAX public transit has hooks to hang several bicycles by
the front tire so that you don't have to hold your bike or block the exits. It
is safer, simpler and takes less space.
1
Protected Bike Lanes Separated or protected bike lanes will enable more people to bike safely.
Currently too many people feel it is dangerous to ride a bike when fast
moving cars are passing them. We can encourage more people to leave
their cars in the garage, and also make it safer for children to bicycle when
protected lanes are provided. Our community would benefit greatly from
this addition, and join others cities that already created safe
bike/pedestrian access.
0
8 to 80 bikeway
network
Build an innovative and inspiring network of bikeways that encourages
and incentivizes everyone to ride - from an 8-year old school kid to an 80-
0
4-20
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 17
Idea Title Idea Likes
year old grandparent.
Bicycling for all ages
and abilities
There is one thing proven to increase bicycle ridership: the amount of
cycletracks. Cities and countries that have higher bicycle mode share have
invested heavily in safe and efficient bicycle infrastructure. Making it fun
and easy for residents to travel by bicycle alleviates traffic congestion,
parking scarcity, CO2 emissions, and increases local business, health of
inhabitants, and neighborhood connections. I saw the CCTA's
presentation and it appears as if most money is going to highways which
is only going to increase the amount of people driving single occupancy
vehicles. "If you build it they will come." The money should be spent
where we want to see transportation growth. Sadly, the proposed
programs show $232,000 going to bike/ped and $6,913,000 going to
arterial/roadway/interchange/expressway/freeway. Despite the comments
from the public and CCTA's big talk, more than 30 times more money is
being spent encouraging driving than bicycling. It is dehumanizing to put
so much money towards an already safe and efficient car infrastructure
when no such infrastructure exists for people on bikes.
0
Widen Diablo Road
for Bike Lane
There are a ton of cyclists that cut through the private roads of Diablo
Country Club because Diablo Road is such a danger to ride on. These
cyclists deserve a safe place to ride to go up to Mount Diablo. This has
been an ongoing problem and someone is going to get killed because
there is no bicycle lane.
0
Make CC County
Truly Bike Friendly
Study bike friendly cities and add protected bike lanes throughout CC
county, so that people will use bikes. If we make it more convenient to
bike, or use public transportation, than it is to drive, then people will
actually use their bikes and we'll see less traffic and pollution.
0
Bicycle paths/multi-
use trails
Please keep paths and trails in good shape. Work with businesses to
provide more incentives for people to walk or bicycle to work.
0
MORE Bike Lanes This is not the first time I have suggested that we, here in Contra Costa
County need more, improved bike lanes. This will more than likely not be
the last time you hear from me, either. Two weeks ago, I was almost hit by
a KinderCare bus, by the driver, not stopping at a reg signal light to turn
right, and the bike lane not being wide enough for me to immediately
jump out of the way. Today approximately 1:00 pm, I was almost hit by a
FEDEx truck (and yes, there were other drivers who witnessed this). The
FEDEx truck did not stop at a stop sign. I was riding on the wrong side of
the street, but that was due to the fact that there was just a small bike
lane on the right side of the road, and a very dangerous area to ride. I
came upon a corner, and just as I was slowing down, the FEDEx truck
pulled up to the stop sign, but only slowed down, before rounding the
corner, thus, running the stop sign. I did call FEDEx and complain, but all
the did was take my name and phone number, and a brief statement. I'm
getting really tired of taking my life in my hands each and every time I
need to get to work or just go to the market. Is this going to take
someone getting seriously hurt, or killed before they do something???
0
Cycling on Diablo
Road
I would like to see Diablo Rd., between the entrance to Diablo and Mt.
Diablo Scenic, widened. For Cyclists it has to be the most dangerous road
in the county. Hundreds of dedicated cyclists ride up the mountain every
week and Diablo Rd. is the road to the entrance to the Park. The road
winds, it's narrow and there is no shoulder. Autos get impatient and pass
on the curves, crossing the yellow lines. Please take a long hard look at
the road. It needs to be widened enough to have a bike lane on both
0
4-21
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 18
Idea Title Idea Likes
sides. Thank you for asking for our input.
Better bike routes We need safe bike routes to rail nodes (BART, Amtrak) and from our
homes to major employment centers (say Richmond to Oakland).
0
Bike friendly lanes in
NE Richmond
We need more bike lanes in Richmond but specifically in the NE
Richmond where many folks WANT to ride their bikes but are simply
afraid to due to the lack of bike lanes and horrible drivers. We need bike
routes throughout the residential streets and down San Pablo Ave
towards Del Norte Bart Station.
0
Improve the path on
Reliez Station Road
in Lafayette
The path up Reliez Station Road in Lafayette needs to be re-paved. It also
currently doesn't allow biking, and it would be nice to make a way for
cyclists to get up that road (the main road section has no shoulder). This is
a major school thoroughfare, and at the very least it needs to be
smoothed, and at best there should be a way to get cyclists up that
section.
0
Bicycle & Buses Need more paths for bicycles throughout the city and more buses. 0
Bike bridge “Flyover”
at Treat Blvd and CC
Canal Trail
The excellent CC Canal Trail is inconveniently interrupted at the juncture
with Treat Blvd, forcing cyclists (and pedestrians) to either cross
dangerously over the fenced median or go 40 yards uphill and wait for a
traffic light. Clever design of a sweeping arc bridge flyover could make
for an "at grade" crossing for bikes and pedestrians.
0
Separated bike lanes The county should develop separate bike lanes in areas with underserved
populations. 23rd Street in Richmond is a great example.
0
Add Bicycle Lanes on
Diablo Rd to Mt
Diablo (South Gate)
Recreational cycling on Mt Diablo has exploded in popularity. Many
cyclists come to Danville to ride up Mt Diablo. Diablo Road desperately
needs bicycle lanes in the most dangerous, curvy, narrow stretch of the
road - From the corner of Diablo Rd and McCauley/Green Valley all the
way to Mt Diablo Scenic Rd & Diablo Rd. Half of the road is maintained by
Town of Danville, and half by the county. The Town of Danville has been
resistant to improving this road. Please, please widen the road just
enough to put in bicycle lanes. I am afraid someone is going to be killed
on this road soon.
0
4-22
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 19
Idea Title Idea Likes
Bicycle Parking Well, it isn't very sexy, but the truth is that one of the biggest
impediments to cycling, and in turn, its benefits to the area (decreased
congestion, etc., etc.,) is the lack of bike parking facilities. The bike parking
at some BART stations, the lockers, are nice, but they're always full. If
they're always full, new people can't discover the benefits of using these
things. We need to design bicycle parking "islands" and other attractive
places to park bikes in a way that people can't damage, pilfer, or just
outright steal parked bikes. It takes imagination and discipline to design
these things so that they are not eyesores, but we can do it if we resist the
time-honored plan of doing it on the cheap. We need to tell the whiners
to shut up, we need to plan, we need to invest, and we need to teach the
naysayers the difference between "expenditure" and "investment." We
could set an example for communities around the country, which, by the
way, is what the Bay Area used to do all the time.
I'd like to submit the following for your viewing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=pcZSU40RBrg
While the above is pretty elaborate, there are certainly designs of a
smaller scale that we could implement. It's difficult to promote cycling as
a social benefit if riders are afraid to take their eyes off their bikes for two
minutes; locked or unlocked. And it's hard to sell others on the benefits of
cycling to the store or to the farmer's market if you emerge to find your
steed gone. Bike racks just don't do it. Thieves take parts off parked bikes,
and sometimes it seems as though they do it out of pure cussedness. But
only people with a stake in it; only people with something to LOSE will be
able to get things done. Judges and politicians don't even have any idea
of what bikes COST, let alone what they MEAN to us, so they low-ball
compensation for a "used" bike and treat the whole episode like an
annoyance.
We have to be aggressive and imaginative. We need to foster competition
in civil and city planning curricula to include bicycle infrastructure
(including parking.) We've already missed many opportunities.
0
Wider bike lanes Most bike lanes, if next to a row of parked cars, put the rider into the
"door zone". If a car door is suddenly opened, the rider can hit that door,
hard. Worse, the rider may bounce onto the traffic lane, inviting a serious
or fatal impact. Because of this fear, I usually ride about on the white line
demarking the bike lane, forcing autos to move to their left. Most drivers
are very understanding. Regardless, the bike lanes if narrow do slow traffic
and create a risk.
0
4-23
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 20
Idea Title Idea Likes
Wider bike lanes,
road sections with
shoulders wide
enough for autos to
pass bikes, and bike
responsive signals
Most bike lanes, if next to a row of parked cars, put the rider into the
"door zone". If a car door is suddenly opened, the rider can hit that door,
hard. Worse, the rider may bounce onto the traffic lane, inviting a serious
or fatal impact. Because of this fear, I usually ride about on the white line
demarking the bike lane, forcing autos to move to their left. Most drivers
are very understanding. Regardless, the bike lanes if narrow do slow traffic
and create a risk.
I'd also like to see wider shoulders, at least in sections, so autos can easily
pass bikes. For example, near BART Orinda, Moraga Way south of the
station, the northbound shoulder is a bit narrow and discourages
commuting to BART by bike. For 30 years, I heard about this section from
others, my own route to BART had no such impediments.
Pedestrian buttons at signals stop traffic for relatively long periods. Is
there some way for bike riders to signal that they only need a short green,
like other traffic, so that the overall traffic flow is not halted needlessly?
My own old steel commuter bike triggered about half of the signals, but
my new much lighter aluminum bike does not.
Thanks to the cities and county for having made bike transportation
feasible.
0
Bicycle Sharrows Despite complying with current guidelines, bike lanes are perilous for
cyclists because motorists tend not to look towards right hand side of
roads and cyclists are expected to travel in zone where car doors can be
opened into their path, drivers may not see cyclists when backing out of
driveways and right hand turners may not see cyclist until too late. As a
cyclist I feel safer when bicycle sharrows are in the middle of the rights
hand lane with share the road signs.
0
Routes of regional
significance
Routes of regional significance for motorists are also routes of regional
Routes of regional significance for bicyclists. We should acknowledge this
in the Countywide Transportation Plan update. To quote the East County
Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance, "Routes of Regional
Significance are roadways that connect two or more subareas of Contra
Costa, cross County boundaries, carry significant through traffic, and/or
provide access to a regional highway or transit facility."
I would accept a designation of a corridor, say a quarter mile on either
side of the route of regional significance, that has a bicycle friendly route
paralleling the arterial street that is the route of regional significance.
The fact of the matter is, a person using a bicycle for transportation
wants/needs to get to the same places that a motorist does. The County's
Bicycle Plan as it is currently written is primarily intended for recreational
bicyclists. I will not bad-mouth this plan. We have to walk before we run,
but using the bicycle plan to plan a route between areas of the county can
result in serious out-of-direction travel.
Here is an anecdotal illustration of how a transportation cyclist uses routes
of regional significance in East County. I work for a company with two
locations, one in Pittsburg and one in Brentwood. Usually I work at the
Pittsburg plant, but occasionally I am dispatched to work out of the
Brentwood plant. It takes about an hour to bicycle the 13 miles between
my home and my Brentwood objective. I use residential streets to get to
Buchanan Road (Buchanan Road is designated as a route of regional
significance). Then I ride my bicycle on Somersville Road (Somersville
Road is designated as a route of regional significance). Then I cut down
0
4-24
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 21
Idea Title Idea Likes
the CCWD canal maintenance road that EBRPD maintains as the Delta de
Anza Trail. I then ride on James Donlon Boulevard (James Donlon
Boulevard is designated as a route of regional significance). I then ride on
Lone Tree Way (Lone Tree Way is designated as a route of regional
significance). Then I ride down Brentwood Boulevard (Brentwood
Boulevard is designated as a route of regional significance). Then I turn
down Sunset Road to Elkins Way, both collector streets. Some of this
route has parallel streets or parallel bike paths that could be used, but
these routes of regional significance are more direct and faster. When
commuting to work, I want to follow the fastest, most direct route, just
like a motorist.
The object of this letter is to urge the CCTA to acknowledge that routes of
regional significance for motorists are also routes of regional significance
for bicyclists and to urge that all designated routes of regional
significance need bike lanes or marked shoulders or closely parallel
bicycle-friendly streets. Such a recognition will go a long way toward
fulfilling the Plan's goal of "expanding safe, convenient, and affordable
alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle."
Thank you for your concern with my continued well-being.
Bicycle Trails I used to commute by bicycle from Martinez to the Naval Weapons
Station. Because there are few or no trails running East-West, I was forced
to fight with traffic (and cyclers who rode on the wrong side of the street).
WHat are your plans in this area?
0
Electric Bike Share Makes economic sense. Makes health and environmental sense. Would
build community. Would reduce traffic.
0
Widen Trails and
make lanes
As a speed biker, I often travel at 20 mph or faster, it would be nice to
have the trails wider and with lanes.
There are many times I have to grind to a halt because a group of people
completely block the path. Paths are only about 3 people wide, and many
have animals as well. I think a wider path in general will help, and lanes
can help focus faster moving traffic know where to be.
0
Biking with cars is
scary
Please add stripes to roads for bike thoroughfares. Bicyclists have to
negotiate around cars parked on the shoulder. Passing auto drivers are
surprisingly aggressive and careless.
0
Iron Horse Trail
extension to BART
We need a safer way to get from the Iron a Horse Trail to Walnut Creek
Bart. Ygnacio Valley Rd is too dangerous!
0
Access to Iron Horse
Trail
It is difficult and dangerous to access Iron Horse Trail from the Diablo
Valley College/Sun Valley Mall area. There is no crosswalk to get from the
North side of Willow Pass Road to the South due to the I680 freeway exit.
There could be an easy access from the North sidewalk to the Willows
Shopping Center but a fence prevents that. The sidewalk over the bridge
on the North of Willow Pass is very narrow - barely room for a cyclist
walking their bike and a pedestrian to pass. If you manage to do that, you
can finally get - via Diamond Blvd - to the trail where it goes by The
Willows.
I often see cyclists cutting through the Sun Valley parking lot to connect
with this trail or downtown Concord.
0
4-25
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 22
Idea Title Idea Likes
Marsh Road Bicycle
Route
Although Marsh Road around Buchanan Field is a designated bike route,
it is not very safe. The Northbound traffic lane is not very wide and there
are often 18-wheelers parked along the curb. And cars often go 45 mph
there! The Southbound traffic lane is also narrow and cyclists traveling in
that lane tend to block traffic. Cars have to cross a double-yellow line to
pass and often have to wait for on-coming traffic to go by. Often, cyclists
traveling South choose to ride on the sidewalk and dodge whatever
pedestrians are there.
Land is certainly available between the Northbound lane and the airport
fence for a wonderful pedestrian/bicycle path.
Many cyclists do use this route:
1. It connects a large residential area to the North Concord Business Park
2. There is Iron Horse Trail access at the North of Buchanan Field
3. You can connect with Olivera Road and thus to the North Concord
BART station or John Muir Medical Center's Concord Campus.
4. You can connect with
0
Improve bicycle
safety design in
general
Several small things could make life as a bicycle commuter less deadly:
-Make signage on bike path cross walks (e.g., Ohlone Greenway) more
clear about right of way for bicycles as well as pedestrians.
-Put crosswalk flashers at all bike path crosswalks.
-Continue to increase bike lanes and never protect extra space around the
median when that could be used as a bike lane (e.g., Carlson Ave between
Cutting and Bay View).
-Work with the DMV to include questions about bicycle safety on the
written drivers exam, such as bicycle right to the full lane and safe door
opening when parallel parked.
0
BUSES
When will you start
accepting CLIPPER?
The system has been around for about ten years and your company is the
only one not accepting it! Please let us know if and when you will.
26
Provide more short
bus links to BART
stations
Especially into hilly places, we need short bus links to BART stations. This
is so more people can comprehend a life without two cars in every
driveway. Hand in hand with this would be attention to providing
walkable sidewalks instead of dirt shoulders.
18
More bus routes and
times
I believe the overall Contra Costa County Connection bus system should
be improved with more bus routes, as well as better scheduled times
between bus stops.
Before 2008, the bus system was easy to manage and work around, with
multiple routes to choose from and a reasonable wait time between stops.
Now the routes have been cut in half, sometimes having to go through a
route that's roughly 2 hours out of the way just to reach your destination,
and the wait times have gone from a wait time of 30 minutes to a wait
time of an hour and 45 minutes, A simple bus ride has gone from having
to leave a half hour early to make your destination, to having to leave 3
hours early, just to even make it on time to your destination.
I believe if we were to add more routes and improved wait times, the
quality of public transportation will rise exponentially and make people
more drawn to public transportation, thus lowering the amount of drivers,
as well as lowering the levels of co2 and receive financial backing from
"green" industry.
17
improve Ygnatio
Valley in Walnut
Make the right lane westbound in the morning a bus-only lane, and the
right lane eastbound in the evening a bus-only lane would encourage bus
16
4-26
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 23
Idea Title Idea Likes
Creek ridership, increase
bus frequencies, and reduce traffic congestion.
Ygnacio Valley Road
BRT
Build BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) in the median of Ygnacio Valley Road, so
more people would get out of their cars and ride public transit with faster
travel times and better frequencies. After BRT, the county can upgrade it
to LRT if ridership grows.
14
Free Shuttles to
BART
Could use frequent and free shuttles to BART 9
More busses to BART Increased frequency and more short loops to BART, less walking distance
between bus lines, and get Clipper online ASAP
9
Improve bus
scheduling
I am retired and I would like to use more public transportation, but I can't
because there isn't enough buses. I think using those huge buses is a
waste (they run mostly empty) and it would be much better to have
smaller buses and more frequent trips. For example, lines 11,14 and 15
reach Pleasant hill Bart between 2 minutes of each other and then there
isn't another for an hour or more.
4
Rural buses I would like to see a bus through Alhambra Vallley Rd. on a scheduled
basis. Westcat could come through this area from Pinole. Additionally I
would like the County Connection buses for disabled and seniors service
this area as well.
3
Route Maps and
Schedules
Place Free Route Maps and Schedules in the lobbies of multi-family
housing along the Route, much like CCCTA Maps and Schedules are at
Kaiser Hospital and the Lesher Center.
3
Bus Rapid Transit for
SEVERAL corridors
Contra Costa Blvd., Monument Blvd., Willow Pass Rd., Highway 4 (from
where BART construction ends) San Ramon Rd., San Pablo Ave., should all
have BRT amenities (bus queue jump lanes or maybe even dedicated
transit ONLY lanes), making transit more efficient and attractive, even if
ONLY during commute hours. In this way, people who have the choice to
take transit will be more interested in doing so, because travel times will
be more competitive between transit and private autos than they are now.
This would allow us to use our existing infrastructure more efficiently,
without the expensive cost of building more lanes to accommodate more
people. In this way, we could also build ridership to demonstrate support
for future, heavier investments (BART, light rail, or just more BRT
amenities).
3
BART To West
Contra Costa County
The Pinole/Hercules area really needs a BART station. We paid for BART all
these years through our taxes, but all we got was BART ending in a little
stump in Richmond. And no plans to extend further. Richmond station, El
Cerrito del Norte and Orinda do not service our area well. We need our
own station. AC transit is limited and overcrowded, so it's not really an
alternative.
3
BART to HILLTOP
(Richmond)
Please extend Bart from El Cerrito del Norte to Hilltop in Richmond to
avoid traffic congestion on Hwy 80.
3
Improve bus service More frequent and more extensive (more routes) service will make busing
much more practical.
3
More Bus Routes &
Times plus an
additional Route to
Walmart in Martinez
I love going on buses, but the only problem is that the routes available in
my area are 18 & 28.. Most of the time I choose 28 because it gets me to
where I want to go faster unlike the 18. But I do wish though that there
are more times because sometimes I feel like I am about to miss the bus
and that the stops are just too spread out to where I'm at!!! I also wished
2
4-27
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 24
Idea Title Idea Likes
there is a stop not only near walmart and that shopping center, but near
Morello Park elementary school because I live in that area... The stops are
located way down the way and there are times I might or mostly miss the
bus!!! please consider putting a much closer stop and add extra routes!
Greatly expand bus
service.
County Connection (central county) needs to quadruple in frequency and
double (at least) in coverage area. Other ideas presented here touch on
this same need. All of the other bus related ideas are good steps in the
right direction.
2
Bus service If County Connection is ever going to serve commuters,, they must be
given sufficient funds to increase frequency of service. Commuters are not
going to use routes that run every 60 or 80 minutes. Otherwise CCCTA will
only serve transit-dependent in-county riders.
2
Better bus transit ALL
along Mt. Diablo
Blvd in Lafayette
Neither the Veteran's Center, nor the Lafayette Reservoir, nor the housing
and the commercial buildings towards the west end are accessible by bus.
If they were, more people could also connect to BART.
2
Concierge
Bus/Shuttle Service
I think traditional bus service in suburbia needs to be redesigned. I think
you could attract more riders with smaller vehicles, more frequent service
and more point-to-point routes. One of the biggest drawbacks to using
buses is the time it takes to get from “Point A to Point B”•. For people
that want to use the bus, have a Guaranteed Ride Home option/program
available to them. Also, more promotion of ride sharing options for major
employers in the area.
2
San Ramon LightRail Traffic congestion on Bollinger in San Ramon is increasing steadily due to
new housing and school development. We desperately need affordable
mass transit for commenters and students to and from school and work
along this entire corridor, from the 680 interchange (Park and Ride) and
Bishop Ranch through Gale Ranch and Windemere all the way to Dublin
Bart! Let's take a page out of the availability and accessibility of mass
transit in so many European cities and establish an efficient model for
other counties to duplicate!
2
Bringing BART to
Vallejo, Hercules,
Pinole or El Sobrante
I have noticed that many commuters that take BART that commute to the
Richmond and El Cerrito Del Norte BART stations come from Vacaville,
Fairfield, Vallejo, Crockett, Hercules, Pinole and El Sobrante. Since many of
us have to drive to get the the BART stations, since there aren't any closer
to us to get to our destinations. I think BART should build a station or
stations in these areas. It would be a positive thing for commuting all
around.
2
Better Bus Stop Hi. I get on the #6 to go to BART and the stop is very hard to get to. It is
not near a crosswalk or stop light.
Location is across from Campo HS between Campolindo Dr and Rheem
Blvd.
Thanks,
Mary
1
Senior
Transportation
Have more bus stop and more bus schedules especially on
unincorporated area of Danville. Also pick-up and drop off for seniors at
their residence as needed.
1
Express bus service
from Lamorinda to
SF at rush hour
BART is running at capacity. Many who commute from Lamorinda to SF
must drive to BART, but there is limited parking. Solution: run express
buses from areas with significant SF commuters, such as Orinda Downs,
Sleepy Hollow, St. Stephens, Glorietta, Ivy Drive, Moraga, St Marys
College,.Rheem, Burton Valley, Northgate.
1
4-28
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 25
Idea Title Idea Likes
Weekend Hours &
Clipper Card Usage
I do realize that people do not like to work on the weekends but I still
want to know why there are no buses after 9 PM. Here's the simple logical
idea: people like to spend their Saturday nights outside and usually it
takes quite long till probably like after 7 PM. Well it's easy for them who
own vehicles but for those who don't, I suppose we still need to take a
bus to get home. So please, extend the operational hours for the
weekends and also please apply clipper card usage as one of the payment
methods besides cash because I believe it would make the trip become a
lot more enjoyable and obviously you do not need to provide $2 of cash
before we get on the bus.
1
bus fare payments There needs to be a more quicker way to pay cash for bus fare, if bus
agencies are not going to adopt the clipper card system. Many patrons
that use cash to pay for fares won't take their cash out before the bus
arrives, with the proper fare amount, for whatever reason. This prevents
the buses from departing on time.
1
Hillside
transportation
system.
I live on the central part of a Very steep street in West County. There are
bus routes that pass by on the flat below and on Arlington above. There is
also a BART station within a little more than a mile. Despite that, until I
retired I always commuted by auto. Why becasue I would have had to
climb the steep hill once a day with my briefcase etc and BART parking is
usually full. There are many people in similar situations. Idea. What is
needed is a system of mini buses or vans that regularly run up and down
each of the major (and selected lesser) roads that connect San Pablo and
Arlington. The system would have very frequent stops or would stop be
curbside request. This would encourage a lot of people to use public
transport who otherwise would not and would also take some pressure off
the BART parking lots. It would also take some pressure off existing
programs for seniors.
1
Bus Service
Improvement
We need more bus service, and we need to make our streets more bus -
friendly and the county and local governments need to stop looking at
buses as a traffic impediment and forbidding bus stops at logical places
such as Monument and Buskirk.,
Future commercial developments should be made more bus-friendly by
locating them directly on the street with a bus stop right in front rather
than in the middle of a giant parking lot. Future housing developments
should be bus accessible building them grid style with easy access to
streets where buses run rather than in cul-de-sac style. People are not
going to use public transportation if they have to walk too far to get
there.
1
Need Better Bus
Connections
BART is coming to Antioch. It is not "real" BART, but it is something. Once
you get to Concord, however, the bus connections to the workplaces are
not fast and efficient and the total cost of the trip ends up being more
than the cost of driving the car I already have.
1
AC Transit bus 74 to
Orinda BART
Return this vital service for residence of the El Sobrante/ Richmond area.
This line had been in effect (and people bought their homes here because
of it) and then it was discontinued. The traffic on San Pablo Damn road is
terrible. We are in a public transit desert, our area is completely car
dependent. Please reinstate this vital link. We want to get out of our cars.
The Orinda BART is much closer, and a more direct route, to our area then
the Richmond BART.(Orinda is just the next town over from El Sobrante,
besides the open space)
1
4-29
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 26
Idea Title Idea Likes
shelters for riders I think you should treat riders like people and provide more bus stop
shelters. Since the addition of shelters on San Pablo Ave, near Shamrock
Ave and Richmond Parkway, about a year or two ago, I see more people
riding the bus, feeling safer and more a part of the system.
We also need more service on weekends. period.
1
Improve 680 corridor
with BART or more
buses
A BART connection between Dublin and Walnut Creek would be great. At
least add more express buses, including Pleasant Hill BART and Bishop
Ranch
1
Transfers between
bus lines
Get bus lines to cooperate among each other to make transferring from
one bus line to another smoother and less time-consuming, and to
minimize the need to transfer. This might include synchronizing schedules
at major transfer points to shorten waits and minimize missed buses.
Extend major routes for a reasonable distance for overlap along transit
corridors. For example, I live only c. 1-1/2 mile south of the El Cerrito Del
Norte BART station. To get to church and choir practice in Pinole and back
(twice a week), I have to take AC Transit that 1-1/2 miles, then wait for the
WestCat J bus--then reverse the process on my return..
1
Prioritize transit in
budgeting
In budgeting, prioritize public transit over new highway construction. I
believe this would be more cost-effective. Highway construction is very
expensive, while adding to and upgrading rolling stock, adding routes and
supporting operations to make transit more attractive can take cars off
the road and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (mandated by the state).
1
The Orinda Corridor When AC Transit stop the service to the Orinda Bart Station from Casro
Rance road, a lot of people were inconvenienced by the untimely move. If
that corridor could be put back into action it would help so many people
who now get to their families a little later then desired. Putting this Orinda
Corridor back would lessen commuter travel time and make available a
carpool spot for easy pickup from Castro Ranch road and San Pablo Dam
road... I know because I was one of the drivers.
1
School Bussing *Provide school bussing for all kids in California for environmental and
economic opportunities. Reduce traffic and enable parents to work
normal hours
1
Monument Corridor
Connection to Public
Services
GOAL: A shuttle connecting medical facilities, schools, and shopping
running every hour across the Monument corridor connecting low income
riders to necessary services for families.
Currently a person without a car must connect through Concord BART. A
mom with a couple of children needing to use public transportation can
spend over a half a day going 2-3 miles because of the current bus route.
Buses to WIC on Stanwell Circle only run every two hours. By having a
direct shuttle this time would be cut and families could connect to
medical appointments and schools.
Suggested route: Begin at Mitchell Drive near Kaiser. Proceed on Oak
Grove with stops connecting Ygnacio Valley High School, Oak Grove
Middle School, La Clinica de la Raza, and shopping at Monument Blvd;
proceed on Meadow Lane to Market with stops connecting Unity Council
Head Start, First Five, Park N Shop, and Monument Crisis Center. Continue
on Concord Avenue to Stanwell Drive and Contra Costa County WIC
program. This route would connect to current CCTA bus routes
connecting to both Concord BART and Pleasant Hill BART.
1
Bus route Shuttle to connect to existing bus routes for low income families 1
4-30
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 27
Idea Title Idea Likes
More express buses
from East Dublin bart
and West Dublin Bart
more express buses leaving Dublin bart
I took Bus 97x fromEast Dublin bart. 5:10pm is too early, I take bart after
5pm from work in San Leandro,Ca Bart leaves around 5:04pm plus 22
minutes Bart plus walk to bus stop. I would prefer bus leave Dublin Bart
after 5:40pm. What is the out of service bus that parks near where Bus 97x
used to be and arrives before 6pm.
I have not found any CCTA buses that go to or near West Dublin Bart.
Why not? If I had a choice I would rather get off Bart at West Dublin
station. I work closer to the Dublin line even though I live in Danville. I
have seen a lot of buses that go to Walnut Creek Bart but I work closer to
the Dublin Bart Line.
1
Transportation Idea Goal: A shuttle connected medical facilities, and shopping running every
hr across the Monument corridor connecting low income riders to
necessary services for families.
Currently a person without a car must connect through Concord Bart. A
mom with a couple of children needing to use public transportation can
spend over a half a day going 2-3 miles because of the current bus route.
Buses to WIC on Stanwell Circle only run every two hours. By having a
direct shuttle this time would be cut and families could connect to
medical appointment and schools.
Suggested route: Begin at Mitchell Drive near Kaiser. Proceed on Oak
Grove with stops connecting Ygnacio Valley High School, Oak Grove
Middle School, La Clinica de la Raza, and shopping at Monument Blvd;
proceed on Meadow Lane to Market with stops connecting Unity Council
Head Start, First Five, Park N Shop, and Monument Crisis Center. Continue
on Concord Av. to Stanwell Drive and Contra Costa County WIC program.
This route would connect the current CCTA bus routes connecting to both
Concord Bart and PH Bart.
1
Mt Diablo Blvd
Trolley
Please consider putting a trolley similar to the one in WC along Mt Diablo
blvd in Lafayette. With the increasing number of assisted housing facilities
and the parking problems in downtown Lafayette, this would be a great
addition to the community.
1
Increase Bus Service
and Frequency
throughout County
Please work with all transit operators in the county to expand
neighborhood bus service by creating new bus lines and increasing the
frequency of the major bus lines. The county should have a goal to have a
bus stop within a half mile (10 minute walk) of most homes in the county
(where ridership may be sustainable)
To prioritize where bus service may be financially viable, work with Clipper
to get data about regular BART riders. If they live in the county and don't
currently use a bus to get to BART, this could help give you a ball park
idea of where new bus service may be needed. This would be extremely
helpful to shuttle people to/from BART stations or other major
destinations in the county.
1
Transportation Idea Transportation Idea
GOAL: A shuttle connecting medical facilities, schools, and shopping
running every hour across the Monument corridor connecting low income
riders to necessary services for families. Currently a person without a car
must connect through Concord BART. A mom with a couple of children
needing to use public transportation can spend over a half a day going 2-
3 miles because of the current bus route. Buses to WIC on Stanwell Circle
only run every two hours. By having a direct shuttle this time would be cut
and families could connect to medical appointments and schools.
1
4-31
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 28
Idea Title Idea Likes
Suggested route: Begin at Mitchell Drive near Kaiser. Proceed on Oak
Grove with stops connecting Ygnacio Valley High School, Oak Grove
Middle School, La Clinica de la Raza, and shopping at Monument Blvd;
proceed on Meadow Lane to Market with stops connecting Unity Council
Head Start, First Five, Park N Shop, and Monument Crisis Center. Continue
on Concord Avenue to Stanwell Drive and Contra Costa County WIC
program. This route would connect to current CCTA bus routes
connecting to both Concord BART and Pleasant Hill BART.
389 Bay Point Loop;
201 to Concord; and
393 to Bay Point
Two suggestions:
There is NO BUS running to Pittsburg BART or Concord BART between
10a-11a. Please add a bus either the 389 or 201 during that time so I can
go to SF.
Bus 389 extend the P.M. hours leaving Pittsburg BART to 9:45PM instead
of 8:40pm.
0
Join TransLink Buses in Concord would be more appealing if I could use my TransLink
pass.
0
Thought from
someone having a
Clue about mass
transit
I have been employed by a large Bay Area transit agency for 30 years
supporting buses on the street providing transportation. Sadly I have seen
my employer's service area shrink, and the number of buses and ridership
decrease. My first fifteen years I worked on first generation electronic
revenue collection equipment, and helping to spec its replacement, and
the Orbital GPS system. Integration of GFI farebox, data with time, date,
demographic, and location at first made me hopeful my employer would
be able to put buses where needed and when needed. Unfortunately even
with the data to do it, making proper adjustment for labor agreements, I
didn't see significant improvement. My suspicion is the problem was
leadership of elected officials with deference to constituent complaints
without proper fact checking.
For my second 15 years and continuing, I have been involved in fleet
fueling, environmental compliance, and fire life safety. I can't stress
enough the importance of proper maintenance of facilities, and actuarial
accounting for their timely replacement. Every employer has a
responsibility to ensure their employees are safe and, and their customers
served. Following Critical Path Management, to put buses on the street
fueling equipment, and the emergency generator powering it must work,
and proper safety for maintenance and drivers on property.
I first learned about Ottawa's Busways when researching ergonomics of
bus seats with a background in classic time and motion systems. Nothing
beats a bus for economy if properly deployed using Busways. Every time I
see a Bart Train I want to hurl: It's dirty, and when riding in them they are
filthy and smell. Never have I ever seen a either a CCTA or a bus of my
employer look or stink like Bart's rolling stock. A properly maintained
municipal bus system keeps tax money at home employing their own, and
buses are replaced about every twelve years, usually with some of their
construction local.
Presently only Muni is the only light rail system anywhere near justifiable
due to population density. VTA rail like Bart is flushing tax money down
the toilet. Other than expansion to North San Jose, no more Bart
expansions!
Contra Costa's suburban islands composition is well suited to Busways. It
would have cost less to run additional exclusive bus lanes from Concord
0
4-32
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 29
Idea Title Idea Likes
Bart to Brentwood, with stops at North Concord, Bay Point, Pittsburg,
Oakley, and Brentwood as I suggested. From what I calculated, at the time
it would have provided a bus every six minutes at every stop during
commute hours, providing employment opportunities for local residents.
Imagine the cost of lowering the grade over hill from Concord to Bay
Point to accommodate dirty Bart trains. That cost alone easily would have
paid for a significant part of the entire roadway. A Busway between
Pittsburg and Walnut Creek Bart is 20 years overdue!
> The PDF I wanted to attach isn't there because your Email address
Bounced with Outlook <
METRO DC with better light rail than BART is considering the addition of
Busways:
http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/19792/bus-pads-turn-
freeways-into-busways/
New Jersey Transit Busways are awesome
http://www.fta.dot.gov/printer_friendly/12351_4392.html
Just wanting to look good doesn't mean you won't fall flat on your face
without proper planning. I remember Muni's politics of emptying a diesel
tank, putting in Biodiesel claiming to be green. By not cleaning the tank
and pipes, heating them, and attaching a proper dispenser with proper
filters, MUNI ended up rebuilding around a dozen bus engines. MUNI in
2011 pled "No Contest" to an EPA prosecution resulting in a $250,000 fine
for not responding to a leak alarm spoiling the bay with 60,000 gallons of
diesel
http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Feds-say-Muni-workers-let-fuel-
spill-into-bay-3282018.php
> Nothing is free, but when properly conceived and executed, everything
can cost a lot less <
children bus fares My child gets the bus to school and home and a daily pass is $3.35 and a
monthly pass is $57. In England children over the age of 5 but under 18
get cheaper fares and I think this should happen here. Children should be
able to show their school id and get cheaper fares.
0
PLEASE improve AC
Transit bus #7
So many people in the Richmond View, El Cerrito Hills, and Kensington
neighborhoods would like to be able to rely on the #7 rather than drive
along Arlington Ave. back and forth everyday. It is NOT reliable. I tried to
switch from driving to the bus for four months last year. The #7 came
intermittently. Everyone I have talked to has expressed frustration with
this busline. Also please increase the hours of operation. I have picked up
Berkeley professors coming up the hill after missing the last (7:00) bus.
AND we need another bus in Richmond View to continue all the way
down the Arlington. There once was one. Bring it back!!
0
Bus schedule change
and size
Please start the new service for the route 7 PH Bart about 6-6:30 and use
smaller vehicles until size of user group determined. We need to be at
Bart by 7:20 and I imagine same for others who have a 8 AM starting time
in the city.
The new Safeway plan should include an overhead pedestian walkway like
that by PH Bart. With so many kids going to Northgate schools from
Shadelands area and increase in traffic, I foresee a very dangerous walk
across YVR without improvements.
Thank you
0
4-33
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 30
Idea Title Idea Likes
Connect Walnut
Creek to Concord
Create an Express route to connect Concord to Walnut Creek. 0
Bus Route from
Sycamore Valley Park
and Ride to
Blackhawk Plaza
Along Cam Tass
Make it happen 0
San Ramon LightRail Traffic congestion on Bollinger in San Ramon is increasing steadily due to
new housing and school development. We desperately need affordable
mass transit for commenters and students to and from school and work
along this entire corridor, from the 680 interchange (Park and Ride) and
Bishop Ranch through Gale Ranch and Windemere all the way to Dublin
Bart! Let's take a page out of the availability and accessibility of mass
transit in so many European cities and establish an efficient model for
other counties to duplicate!
0
Buses Provide buses that pick up passengers at adequate/approved parking
areas in Concord/Pleasant Hill/Walnut Creek/Lafayette/Orinda and
transport to San Francisco Transit Center, and other areas which many
passengers need to get to. And return bus service to come home in the
afternoon/evenings. Richmond area has great bus service to SF. Let's get
that down here, too.
0
Buses : Let's make
them an efficient
alternative!
Express buses were something I loved in another city. Catch the bus after
parking at a major hub and fly past the 16 or more stops in between. We
don't see a lot of that in CC County.
Many of us would love to be able to take a bus into work. But the time,
money, and shoe leather required to take a local ride to/from work is not
efficient. For me, each week it would cost $22.50, 15 hours, and 10 miles
on foot to traverse the 7 miles I travel to work. It doesn't make sense
when I could drive in 15 minutes (30 min. daily) and gas would still be less
expensive. Let's make things efficient and something people can include
in their schedule.
0
1. bus frequency 2.
BART parking
1. CCCTA bus route frequency and areas of coverage are lacking. Funds
are needed to increase headways and operate routes in areas currently
not covered. 2. It is not possible to park at a BART stn. after 10 AM in
central County. All lots are full. Satellite parking lots with bus shuttles are
desperately needed.
0
Bring back High
School Supplemental
Buses
We used to have the supplemental buses for high school students which
for some reason stopped. Students are having to take regular bus lines,
which in some cases can take the student 1 1/2 hours to get home. The
supplemental buses ran once in the morning and once in the evening
which was sufficient. PLEASE bring them back.
0
Extend Tri Delta
Transit
As more and more people are moving to Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley,
more people are depending on public transportation to get to BART. I
come from Brentwood, so if the buses came twice an hour instead of once
an hour, i feel the buses will be less packed. Any help would be
appreciated!
0
Ferries, Busses BART has a near monopoly for public transportation getting people into
San Francisco from Eastern Contra Costa County. It would be good to
have bus service or ferry as an option.
0
Express buses Both BART and many Transbay buses to San Francisco are crowded at 0
4-34
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 31
Idea Title Idea Likes
rush hour. In the short term, it seems that more express buses are needed.
Better springs on
buses
Vibration and bumps on AC Transit and WestCat buses (I can't speak for
other lines in the county) are sharp and intense. This is for the regular
routes, not the Transbay routes with tour-style buses. It feels as though
there are no springs at all. Though I haven't spoken to a bus mechanic, it
seems to me that it couldn't be very expensive to beef up the springs. This
would make rides much more comfortable and could bring new riders to
help pay for the upgrade.
0
Improving bus
reliability and access
First, provide parking for people using buses at the Del Norte BART hub.
Since many people live in the hills around that station, walking or bike
riding to the bus is prohibitively difficult, meaning bus riders need to find
someone to drive them to the station. This is counter-productive.
Second, local busses -- especially the #7 -- are too unreliable to use if you
have to get somewhere on time. When I have tried to rely on the #7, it
often has not shown up or arrived so late that I missed my appointments.
Increased reliability will lead to increased ridership will lead to increased
revenues.
0
Improve access to
the hills
Provide more reliable public transportation connections to the East Bay
hills in Richmond, El Cerrito, and Kensington to allow residents to get to
shopping and BART without having to drive, especially since parking at
BART stations is often unavailable.
0
buses to BART and
E.C. Plaza from
Marina Bay
I live in Marina Bay. The buses (requiring transfer) take up to a full hour to
go to the El Cerrito Plaza BART, a 10-minute ride by car, as it detours
through the Richmond BART station. At times when my car is not available
or when I want to ride BART to the airport, I have had to use taxi service
instead -- which I'll never do again as the taxis from BART are filthy and
expensive. Please improve the bus routes to and from BART and to El
Cerrito Plaza for the Marina Bay area.
0
better bus routes
from Marina Bay
Please improve bus routes from Marina Bay, Richmond, to local BART
stations and to El Cerrito Plaza. Four buses are required, taking up to an
hour, to El Cerrito Plaza, a ten-minute ride by car. I have had very bad
experiences with taxis to and from BART and will no longer consider them
an option, which excludes my using to BART to the airport or on days
when my car isn't available.
0
Public transit to
Martinez
Public transit from west county to County services in Martinez is poor.
Add bus lines to the Highway 4 corridor possibly via the new Hercules
transit hub.
0
Buses Merge Tri-Delta and County Connection. Changing from bus line to bus
line and sometimes to BART between them is a costly pain for commuters.
0
Lucia T S Instead of using in CCTA those big busses, change to shuttle busses, more
of them, more routes and more often
0
For Our Students in
Pinole and Hercules
Westcat should provide a monthly pass for our students in Pinole and
Hercules to help them get around. Currently, Westcat only provides a
youth pass that's good for 20 rides (that's only good for 10 days!) Not to
mention that these students also pay the regular bus fare. AC Transit has a
monthly unlimited pass for students, this is what Westcat should do.
0
4-35
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 32
Idea Title Idea Likes
Bus arrival tracking I was recently waiting for a bus and at the scheduled arrival time there
was no bus. I had no idea if I had missed the bus or the bus was late. That
was extremely frustrating. The bus finally arrived about 10 minutes late.
There should be an application for a mobile phone to allow me to know
exactly where the bus is so I don't need to worry. There is an app on the
bus web site which is not specific to our transit system and to me was
useless. I use a similar app for BART which works really well. It allows me
to time when to be on the station for the next train. There needs to be
something similar for the bus.
0
Ygnacio Valley Road
Shuttle
A shuttle should run up and down Ygnacio Valley Road from Oak Grove to
the BART station every 30 minutes from 9am until 11 pm. I would leave
my car at home and go shopping or dining!
0
bus routes We need more buses to get around in San Pablo and Richmond.
We need more buses or Ferries to get us to SF. It would be nice.
We need buses that will easily take us from Pinole, San Pablo to
Richmond, El Sobrante, el Cerrito and even Emeryville. We need several
buses not just 3 a day!
0
IAm Portable Hybrid
Trailer Group, -unit-
base
The Portable hybrid unit, Semi-trailer PC, cells 34MW energy efficiency
savings, demonstrate 34 M Watts estimated power transmission and
distribution using the ready made fiber optical cable to consume usable
efficiency energy savings, power from the unit power base. Using the
embedded P Vs an solar atomic cellular concept package, as stated in
business narrative, a hybridization concept cellular atoms cells group, bar-
code as a technology as: 48x4+12, in a group wired set , of colorist codes
intrinsic atomic cellular atoms cells. Tracking it bar-code concept, by using
a G P S, an satellite communication system device, in centric in a crossfire
by the H2, sandwich electrolytes, as is stated in the Utility Patented.
Atomic crystal of lite electrons travel as hybridizing cells, in a group, set of
four groups, all wired for each solar-wings panels design hydrogen atomic
fuel cells, running on carbon hydro-heat, a compressed in heat than
creates more kinetic force of wind energy savings, using the vorticity base
unit, efficiency speed, creates the energy inclosed, as a ion battery storage
compartment, and transmitted back to the distribution grid, tracking all
joules seconds, by the metered rate usages as the cause, but, to be
determine by the (space and time base unit measure distance mph), it
takes in joules using all embedded parts on the monitor machinery Semi
trailer in a moving motion, to harness back the usable efficiency, as the
energy savings. To sale to the grid utility distribution, the utility
companies, at a split, 32/68 split rate efficiency savings. Using a or the
Semi-Unit as a unit base, unit to collects 32% of energy and cost savings
at it 32%, SPLIT rate. And the other 68%, EFFICIENCY energy savings rate ,
its to be paid-out to the Machinery as their utilities efficiency facility, by
them being extension manufacturers, and accepted by the FDD< as the
supported document, Licensee by the Non-Exclusive buy-in contract
clause, as the members and the production suppliers to serve as Joint
Licensees, contractors.
Please review the below link, to give better understanding of the idea unit
and its' chassis base.
http://www.wemoteam.com:2080/iamportable/
Engineer Design and Data Technology Formula For Hybrid Trailer Unit,
Development.
0
4-36
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 33
Idea Title Idea Likes
The Hybrid Semi, PV Solar in an cellular cells, efficiency energy savings
per- unit-contract.
1) The technology power source tracking system will be designed for
three individual tracking mounted units, set up as hertz (seconds) equals
kWh day by day production systems. Component (1) will be a designed
unit, the full capacity (measures 34 KW) is enough power to operate
34000watts, of efficient solar cells (PV modules), for 6 - 12 hours, used in a
24-hour day period. Transmitting at (fifteen cent efficient solar cell), an
estimate ampere watts/volts, between (100-250 kilowatts-hour,) per single
1000watt solar panel x 34 solar panels. For example, an annually
functional tracking energy production machine, built on 53ft, 102wide
hybrid trailer, equaling 34000-kilowatt. The above kilowatts tracking
system will create 0.015 efficient solar cell, x 1000watts= $15.00 per
1000watt solar panel, x 34 solar panels, generates 510 kWh. The 510 kWh,
x 12 hours in two days, (the days are counted as 2 days for 1 day, 6 kWh,
in a day in 360 day year.) 510 kWh x 12 hours is consider to be two 6
hours days counted, which = 6120 kWh, but treated as one 12 hour day.
6120 kWh x 180 days is the full year. Base upon the above theory; the full-
kWh production profits equal $1,101,600, x 5 year warranty. The above
tracking unit sale price is $5,508,000. Each joint owner buyer that purchase
the portable annually green energy kWh-production units, with the
embedded crane in the frame of the solar trailer, will earn a annually 68%
return from the $1,101,600 annual amount, starting in the 1st operating
year, which comes out to a annually amount of $749,088 on their pre-
purchase of a 34000- kWh-unit investment in the 1st 2nd 3n d 4th and 5th
operating year, but after the 5th year; each buyer will collect the energy
potential earning at rate of the 100% amount, from the total production
revenue on the remaining years of the kWh- production unit energy
profits. The 32%, of revenue sales, goes to the “I am Portable
Company― during the five years purchase cost period, this is related to
the install portable power transformer converter cost. The “I am
Portable Company― will be secured by each kWh- production unit
model sale, from the 32%, annual energy production charge to the buyer.
Each of the (kWh) production units the buyer purchase, the buyer will be
held accountable to the seller an annual of 32% of the energy productions
from the units. This figure is base upon the unit sale price. The 53ft, 34000
watts (kWh) energy productions unit sale for $5,508,000, but, it have the
capability to produce (kWh) energy productions @ 1,101,600 a year. The
seller will have ownership of the (kWh) energy production = @ a rate of
352,512. Which is 32% of the yearly productions revenue, too be
subtracted from the annual, 1,101,600 (kWh) energy annual productions.
The seller will collect (352,512) over the five year loan period? If the seller
of the (53ft, 34000 watts unit) sold one unit, it will be the assumption
example of 352,512 x 5 years = 1,762,560 (kWh) energy revenue
production for the seller. The “I am Portable Company― will set the
dealer warranty expense cost amount by a vary precent, by the consumer
sale price of the kWh production-units. The products will continue
yielding great energy dividend way beyond the five year warranty period;
it will potentially continue yielding annual energy return to the buyer for
the estimated 5 to 7 year life of the product, and (kWh) energy idea. We
will spread the 0.028% dealer warranty cost amount, over 5 years. If a
buyer purchases this unit, the warranty will be set up by 0.028% of the
sale price which is $5,508,000. But the warranty will be added only if the
buyer chooses a warranty; this will become an optional expense, added to
4-37
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 34
Idea Title Idea Likes
the dealer-sale price or consumer price, but mandatory to the lease
purchase price on each lease sale of the power source units. The
consumer sale price is $ 5,508,000 and the 0.028% warranty sale price =
$154,224, which equal the cost for a 5 year vary optional warranty price.
Bus Service The bus service in Contra Costa County is not good enough, and the
service to Moraga, where I live, is quite poor. It was okay when we moved
here 11 years ago, but the cutbacks after 2008 really crippled the service.
You can't expect people to use buses, if they are not convenient in both
frequency and place. And we need to get more people into buses and the
BART and out of cars.
0
direct buses Have direct non-stop buses from Pittsburg to San Francisco and back 0
dedicated bus lanes
on highways
Create bus lanes on highways so only big commuter buses can use them 0
Richmond BART bus
shelters
Desperately needed--benches and shelters for people waiting for busses
at Richmond BART Station.
0
BART--Point
Richmond Bus
The 72M is the only bus from BART to Point Richmond. It runs every half
hour and often comes late or not at all. Lots more people will take BART if
you make it easy to get to to the station and back.
0
Bench at stop at
Ventura Dr
Westbound
Bench at Ventura Dr Westbound Stop - instead of folks bringing the Food
Sources shopping carts - and perhaps a trash receptacle.
0
Continuous Bus
Express Lane From
Walnut Creek to
Bishop Ranch
Connect existing diamond lanes through Alamo and Walnut Creek. My
bus races from Bishop Ranch toward Walnut Creek in the diamond lane
until the lane suddenly ends. It then sits in traffic after the diamond lane
ends on 680N squandering much of the saved time from having the first
section of Diamond lane. Build a complete HOV lane network between
Walnut Creek BART and Bishop Ranch for express bus service. Build Direct
Access Ramps so Express Bus services can directly access the HOV lane at
Norris Canyon in San Ramon and Olympic in Walnut Creek without having
to signal across traffic.
0
Place Measure J
Increase to 1 cent
/gal. and use
revenue to fund
more & more
frequent bus routes.
Measure J is currently 1/2 cent/ gal. gasoline for County Transportation.
Gasoline prices have dropped as supply increased and demand decreased.
Buses in the County are running late for a variety of reasons. More
revenue would pay for more bus routes and frequency, and relieve
crowding on BART Trains.
0
VASCO ROAD!!!! Contra Costa County needs to address reasonable means of
transportation for the thousands of daily commuters on Vasco Road. This
road was not built to sustain the traffic to and from Livermore and
beyond. The road is not only dangerous but does not accommodate the
number of cars going out in the early morning and return traffic in the
evening. We are commuters. Most of us who reside in East Contra Costa
County. We contribute to the economy yet no one has address the need
for a shuttle or bus system to and from these East County communities to
the ACE and Bart stations in Livermore and Pleasanton. A bus shuttle
system would alleviate traffic congestion on this road and might prevent
the great number of accidents as well. Most counties have access to other
counties' major transportation hubs except Contra Costa County. Please
look at an alternative to car driving on Vasco Road. Please.
0
4-38
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 35
Idea Title Idea Likes
CARPOOL-RIDESHARE
Reduce bottlenecks
during heavy
commute times
I am able to utilize the carpool lane southbound 680 in the mornings, but
the bottleneck on northbound 680 where the 24 and 680 merge is a pain
in the afternoons. Would love an HOV lane in the northbound direction
where this merge occurs for afternoon rush hour relief.
6
Timing of stop lights
on Ygnacio Valley
Road
Some days that road moves very fast & others slow. It appears that the
traffic light timing in Walnut Creek changes from a pattern that allows
quick traffic flow in rush hour to one that does not allow quick traffic flow.
Please make sure that they light timing is setup for the most efficient rush
hour traffic flow. This effects traffic for miles in either direction, as it is
such a large traffic artery.
2
Casual Car Pool Provide safe, adequate parking and a loading/drop off area for casual
carpools. It works so well in the Vallejo area. Let's get it going in the
Concord/PH/WC/Lafayette/Orinda area.
1
Lyft/Uber commuter
exploitation
I bet if we welcomed them, some drivers would do group commute drives
for people. Let's get that going, especially to Silicon Valley, which is awful
from our area.
1
Carpool flyover
connector ramp from
242 North to 4 East
Start a HOV lane heading on 242-North around Concord Ave, then at the
242/4 interchange, create a HOV connector ramp that will take the 242-
North HOV traffic and extend them to the 4-East existing HOV lane.
This is a huge bottle neck as the carpools heading north on 242 merge
onto hwy 4, and cross lanes of traffic to get onto the existing HOV lane.
This backs up traffic on 4-East from before Solano Way to beyond Willow
Pass Rd.
1
Anti-idling ordinance IN NYC, motorists sitting in parked cars idling their engines more than
three minutes (delivery trucks exempt) are fined, no ifs, ands, or buts.
Result, Big Apple air quality has much improved. Here in Walnut Creek,
idling parked cars are epidemic.
The fines can go toward street and sewer repair, schools,
0
Caldecott Tunnel With the new Caldecott Tunnel, West bound traffic in the morning and
East bound traffic in the afternoon are still a major problem for
commuters. The tunnels should be divided up according to commune
hours ie reserve more lanes for West bound traffic in the morning and
East bound traffic in the afternoon.
0
Toll Roads with local
resident permits
The roads, streets and lanes in our communities are not for foreign
commuter usage. They are residents' corridors and therefore commuters
should pay for the privilege of using communities' roads, streets and
lanes. Resident permits would be issued to allow free use of community
roads, streets and lanes.
0
carpool lane
utilization
Require all seats of a car to be occupied to use carpool lanes. Ban single
drivers in hybrid an electric cars. Exceptions could be for HOV only.
0
Richmond traffic
lights
Time traffic lights and consider intersections to minimize traffic and
congestion. There is no strategy and it wastes gas and time.
0
Fix the San Pablo
Dam Road approach
to 80-W
The intersection of San Pablo Dam Road in San Pablo approaching the 80
on-ramp is continuously congested and unsafe for bicyclists trying to
access Amador Street. It needs a new design!
0
FERRIES
4-39
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 36
Idea Title Idea Likes
Getting you to San
Francisco and back
home, by ferry.
CCTA is actively looking into the possibility of implementing ferry service
as an alternative commute method between West County and San
Francisco. You can learn more about our ferry service study in the
Financial Feasibility of Contra Costa Ferry Service Report <a
href="http://www.ccta.net/_resources/detail/45/1"
target="_blank">here</a>.<br /><br /></div>
19
Ferry Run a Ferry between Bay Point Marina and San Francisco.
Run a shuttle from Pittsburg BART to Ferry.
2
Ferry Richmond
to/from San
Francisco
A ferry from Richmond to San Francisco and back could possibly take
many people of our road. If it is located at the end of Harbour Way South
it also might stimulate more tourists to come from San Francisco to visit
the Rosie the Riveter / WWII Home Front National Historical Park and be a
real boost to the local economy of Richmond. We need more jobs in
Richmond and this might be a real stimulus.
2
Ferries A ferry system linking downtown Antioch and Pittsburg to San Francisco
would be a great way to get more cars off the road. Providing a direct
route to the city would make commuting easier for commuters in east
county. In addition it would help the local economies of down town
Antioch and Pittsburg by bringing working individuals into their area who
will spend money in the local cafes, restaurants, and shops.
1
Richmond ferry A ferry would so vastly improve the Richmond-SF commute. Could be a
real game-changer for a city already on the rebound. I know it's being
discussed, let's keep the momentum going!
1
4-40
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 37
Idea Title Idea Likes
W-BART - west
county passenger rail
extension/ SF
Bayferry needed for
transportation equity
in county.
W-BART - west county passenger rail extension needed for transportation
equity in county.
The western contra costa cities such as Richmond, San Pablo, Pinole,
Hercules and Rodeo/Crockett have not received the same degree of
attention as Central and Eastern county cities in terms of transportation
infrastructure and future investment. In the case of E-BART, for example,
construction is already underway and set to debut this decade -passenger
rail service extending all the way from Pittsburg through Antioch onto
Brentwood. However, Western Contra Costan cities along he I-80 corridor
experience some of the worst traffic not only in the state, but the entire
country. Many of these cities have maritime and industrial legacies from
the world war era (ie Shipyards Richmond, Herucles Dynomite, Refinery
Rodeo, C&H Crockett, etc) and existing infrastructure to improve on
within the urban core of Bay Area. It is important to consider that these
cities have been paying into the BART system tax since its inception in the
70's (far before many of the bedroom communities and tract housing
suburbanization of eastern contra costa occurred in the 90's). At the very
minimum- initial studies, EIR, and planning alongside BART & CCTA &
Union Pacific & BNSF for a western county extension of passenger rail
service is far long overdue. Many of these western county cities are highly
transit reliant with much of our county's poverty being concentrated this
area. Expanded rail service would benefit this population and the region
greatly as I-80 becomes a parking lot as predicted by the MTC in the
decades to come. WETA / SF Bay Ferry has considered a ferry station in
Hercules, however, the dredging (combing back of the bay) needed in
such a shallow part of the Bay would exceed in costs tremendously.
Richmond, which already has a deep water port - should be prioritized for
Ferry service as the Craneway Pavillion (Ford Factory), Rosie the Riveter
National Park, Lawrence Berkeley National laboratory and Richmond
Marina districts are further developed in the Port / Ferry vicinity. Please
contact me for consultancy as my education is in urban geography and i
am a lifelong resident of western contra costa county
(martinez.christiano@gmail.com )
1
Ferry Program Wow, I am so glad that I received the postcard in the mali regarding your
upcoming meetings. I am a Bay Area commuter; for 2 years I commuted
from Walnut Creek to San Jose and I just started a new job in Marin. I
would love to see a ferry from Berkeley to Larkspur. I know that involves
Marin and Alameda county, but it would help a lot to perhaps catch a bus
in Walnut Creek to a ferry near Berkeley. Thank you.
0
I support Ferries -
Rivertown in Antioch
s/b outbound to SF
I want to see the "Rivertown" area of Antioch be developed as a popular
location for families to visit to enjoy restaurants, entertainment (including
plays), music such as Jazz clubs, and special interest shopping (verse big
chain). I believe a Ferry leaving from Rivertown to S.F. would be a huge
draw as a depot including weekend tourists who stop at Rivertown and
then go to SF by Ferry. I believe passengers (such as myself) would easily
pay $14 a person (one way) to ride the Ferry on weekends to SF as part of
the recreational experience in addition to any regular commuters during
workdays going to the city.
0
Build A Ferry Station
in Rodeo
Building a ferry station in Rodeo to provide a ferry service to San
Francisco will remove many cars from highway 80 and Bay Bridge. There is
already ample space for the station where Parker Ave. meets the Bay.
Having electric ferries will greatly help cleaning the air of Bay Area, and
will save a lot of carbon emission too. Let me know if you need
0
4-41
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 38
Idea Title Idea Likes
information on the companies that can set up electric ferry service.
Ferry to San
Francisco
how about a ferry from marina bay pittsburg to san francisco 0
ferries after paying for BART for over 50 years and all we are getting is a diesel
train, lets try ferries. Either from Oakley or Pittsburg, but not Antioch, since
they are anti-everything. You could start with a pick up/drop off at San
Francisco Ferry Terminal. Also could use more drop off/pick up times at
Pier 39
0
Martinez to SF Ferry
service
I would to encourage the idea of extending the West County ferry service
up the strait to Martinez. This would assist in reducing congestion on Hwy
4 West and Hwy 24 West into SF.
0
Ferry to Antioch and
East County
Foster economic development and improve emergency public safety by
increasing ferry services to Antioch.
0
Add ferries from
Pinole area to San
Francisco
Add commuter ferries from the Pinole area into San Francisco, not just to
the Embarcadero but also Mission Bay.
0
Richmond Ferry *Please build ferry terminal at Ford Point asap 0
ferries from Antioch
Pittsburg and
martinez.
All three cities have existing marinas that could be built out for terminals
or shoreline that could accommodate commuters.
In order for it to work, three ferries would have to serve each city due to
seating and potential demand.....Antioch would likely get passengers from
the far CoCo area, Pittsburg would alleviate BART demand as sole option
for that area and Martinez would provide additional service for west
county letting some commuters reverse commute alleviating traffic
pressures....I think that this is a cost effective solution requiring a ferry
vessel and small terminal for each locat I n. Additionally in each location it
allows for residents to have a locall solution such as biking, walking etc to
get to ferry. Finally the martinez ferry would provide an alternative
connection between martinez amtrak and sf for more far flung
commuters.
0
West County Ferry
Service -- Marina
Bay, Point Richmond,
Richmond, + other
community residents
commuting (and
traveling) to SF
Vigorously move ahead with such an effort on all fronts while involving
Bay Area transportation authorities + organizations, State of California
government, particularly with the current Governor in office, members of
the state legislature - our representatives and those involved in public
transportation (committees), and Congressman Miller and Senators
Feinstein & Boxer and Congressional committees. The obvious benefits:
Relieve traffic congestion for commuters and others; and draw as new
residents current and future employees of SF-located businesses and
governments to West County to live by providing an easy commute, and
much more affordable housing than in SF, on the peninsula or in many
east bay neighborhoods.
0
Tax The freeways are getting to be impossible and the time wasted is massive.
Gas taxes have not increased significantly. They should be raised and the
money raised put into ferries, BART and good bus service, with more
service at rush hours and less when demand is low. With more options for
working/learning via the internet, long commutes on BART, ferries or
buses are not really a waste of time provided riders can sit down. If they
can't, it is as much lost time as driving.
0
Richmond Ferry to I know this used to exist to SF, and I have heard rumblings that it will start 0
4-42
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 39
Idea Title Idea Likes
SF and Sausalito again to SF from the Craneway Launch point, However I think it would be
amazing of we could get the ferry to go also to Sausalito. Thanks
Richmond Ferry
Service
Need ferry service from Richmond and to include bike parking. 0
Ferry from RIchmond
to North Bay
I think it would be a fantastic to have a ferry from Richmond to the North
Bay (Marin/Sausalito/etc.). I work in Sausalito, and having another
transportation option would be excellent. I would definitely be a daily
commuter.
Many of my friends and family have said they would use the ferry often,
and would appreciate a Richmond - North Bay ferry route. For example,
my mother is getting older and can no longer drive on the freeway. A
ferry from Richmond to the North Bay would give her the freedom of
mobility. I have other friends who simply don't like driving over bridges.
I sincerely hope this is a possibility and that everything possible is being
done to expedite this process.
0
HIGHWAYS
Improve Ygnacio
Valley in Walnut
Creek
This street is crowded and very slow moving. Could we make it an
expressway or add more lanes?
5
Planning ahead to
keep traffic moving
in east Contra Costa
CCTA is working hard on a study called “TriLink” to
examine if a new transportation link from Brentwood to I-580 or 205
would improve the traffic flow and transportation between counties. Given
the projected population and employment increases in eastern Contra
Costa County and western San Joaquin County over the next 20 years,
we’re researching how heavily impacted corridors might improve
with the construction of a new state route. You can learn more about
these potential corridor improvements in the TriLink 239 Feasibility Study
<a href="http://www.ccta.net/about/download/53a360a198c9a.pdf"
target="_blank">here</a>.
3
680 Corridor This is one of the most vital areas in need of a mass transit solution in
Contra Costa County. Consider looking at Ironhorse Trail right-of-way for
possible rail (BART)and/or other transit efforts.
3
Upgrade 680 and
242 through
Concord and Walnut
Creek.
With the widening of CA-4 in East County and the development of the
Concord NWS, 680 is severely overloaded and will become more so. The
currently planned carpool lane gap closure project on 680 is not nearly
enough to address the growing freeway congestion and neither BART nor
the bus system serve most Contra Costa commuters well. While upgrading
these freeways will be expensive given the limited amount of land
available, it is the only realistic option. I would even be willing to pay a toll
on these roads if it were accompanied by significant new capacity.
2
carpool lane on 680
@ 24 exchange
Why does the carpool lane stop on N. Bound 680 as it approaches 24 in
Walnut Creek? Keeping it flowing all of the way to the exchange would
reduce the horrific congestion that exists on a daily basis each afternoon.
2
Faster trips to San
Francisco and the
Peninsula
It is crazy that traffic from 24 heading to the Bay Bridge must intermix at
grade level with traffic from 580 heading to 80. A simple "flyover bridge"
would save Contra Costa commuters and travelers more time per year
than any other project you could think of. It would provide the biggest
traffic bang per buck spent.
2
4-43
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 40
Idea Title Idea Likes
Fix highway 80
corridor (Pinole
through Albany)
This stretch of the highway is awful, there are many potholes, cracks, no
shoulder, poorly marked lanes, blind curves that make driving this stretch
very dangerous. Please spend sometime allocating time and resources to
fix this stretch of the highway.
2
Extra highways A. We need overpasses from 680 to highway 4 over Concord Naval
weapons station (Can you tell I grew up in San Jose?!) I feel eventually
there will be a perhaps regional soccer or other sports field that will
attract even more people to this area. (Can you tell I now live in
Concord?!)
1
De-bottleneck
Highway 4/242
connection
In the afternoon/evening, highway 242 drops many commuters onto
highway 4 east. HWY 242 has 3 lanes that merge onto HWY 4.
Immediately after the merge, the 242 lanes that merged onto highway 4
reduce down to one lane. This backs up traffic on HWY 4 east all the way
to Morello Ave in Martinez. To compound this problem, the carpool lane
doesn't start until shortly after the merge, which encourages all the
carpool traffic to cut across the HWY 4 traffic to get to the carpool lane. I
would like to see something done to reduce the congestion on HWY 4.
1
HOV or toll lane on
hwy 24
There needs to be an HOV or toll lane on 24 during peak commute hours,
especially around caldecott tunnel.
1
Improving the I-
680/State Route 4
Interchange
One of the largest transportation highway projects in Contra Costa
following the completion of the Caldecott Tunnel Fourth Bore and State
Route 4 Widening project is the I-680/State Route 4 Interchange
Improvement project. This $368 million project will be built in five phases
and includes connectors between I-680 and State Route 4, interchange
improvements, and a widening of Highway 4 for approximately three
miles. The design work related to widening this stretch of State Route 4
began in 2013. When completed, this project will eliminate a decades-old
bottleneck that chokes traffic through Martinez and Concord. CCTA is
actively seeking the necessary funding to complete the other phases of
the Interchange Improvement projects. For more information about
CCTA’s efforts behind this project <a
href="http://www.ccta.net/projects/project/50" target="_blank">click
here</a>.<a href="http://www.ccta.net/projects/project/50"><br /></a>
0
expand I80 find a way to expand I80 to meet the real needs of the taxpaying public 0
Highways- 680
Carpool
Please allow carpool to extend the entire 680 freeway from the 580
intersection towards the bridge to Sacramento on both directions. Thank
you.
0
Tri-Link 239 Connecting East Contra Costa County to I5 is a huge Economic
Development engine for the county. Ending the cul de sac, open up
goods movement and create opportunities for local jobs in East Contra
Costa.
0
Light rail vehicles I hope the feasibility of having Light rail vehicles (like downtown San Jose)
going along 680 between note - this was why I decided to comment on
line; I now see I'm not the only person. Concord and at least San Ramon, if
not Dublin or Pleasanton (wouldn't' that be good for going to the
Alameda Fairgrounds if you're in CCC!); not to mention elevating
congestion in general. I see someone has suggested a 'BRT' as an
intermediate step to this concept. Not to mention those non-drivers being
able to more easily commute to different local tri-valley areas.. just
saying.. thank you!
0
4-44
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 41
Idea Title Idea Likes
Transportation
Transformation -
Automobile
Manufacturers!
Imagine hybrid automobiles traveling on our streets and freeways capable
of rising above the surface roadway and flying 40-50 feet in the air! Other
nations are investing in developing fuel versions of this technology, but
what if American ingenuity led another industrial revolution that put the
first gas/electric carplane to the assembly line? One can imagine
automakers advertising their own model version, CHP carplanes keeping
the roadways safe on ground and in the air space just above, the air traffic
controllers keeping watch closely and reporting carplanes coming into
restricted airspace, etc. Let's dream a little and see if we can somehow
incorporate the world's developing technologies into our 25 year
transportation plan.
0
Upgrade Highway 4
in West County
Given the high volume of traffic on Highway 4 between 1-80 and
Martinez, I'm always surprised how unimproved that stretch of highway is.
Upgrade the highway to eliminate surface crossings and dangerous
curves, and add truck lanes for the grades. A higher capacity connector
between westbound Hwy 4 and westbound 1-80 would do much to
alleviate congestion, too.
0
Upgrade the Vasco
Road corridor
A divided, high capacity north-south commuter route is long overdue in
East Contra Costa County. Currently Vasco Road meets that need, but
even with recent improvements it's still dangerous and congested. I
realize part of this route is in Alameda County's jurisdiction, but I'm sure a
joint effort between the counties could accomplish a lot.
0
Bypass Bypass bottlenecks near population centers such as the 680/24
interchange where you have large volumes of traffic needing to change
lanes and enter and exit the highway all at the same time. If you cannot
expand a road or create a bypass due to topography or lack of space,
consider going over or under. Overpasses have a negative aesthetic
impact, but tunneling through some of the hills or under highly populated
areas could be possible, and would remove through-traffic from driving
through those same areas.
0
better community
planning
most of the transportation infrastructure channels users to limited high
density work locations. community planners exacerbate already arduous
commutes by continuing to plan segregated communities from those
work locations forcing longer resource consumptive, and dissatisfying
commutes.
transportation infrastructure is built with public funds. employers receive a
direct subsidized benefit in using the transportation system to deliver
workers to their locations to engage in economic gain.
community planners must break their current habit of channeling workers
away from their communities at a public cost by diversifying their
planning models in order to reduce negative transportation experiences
and impacts and to improve work-life balance.
0
Continuous HOV
Lanes on Freeways
throughout the
County
The freeway carpool lanes would be more effective if a carpooler and
buses had a continuous system of carpool lanes, interchanges and exits
throughout the county. The current system is incomplete (no HOV on 242
or 24; interrupted HOV on I-680).
0
4-45
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 42
Idea Title Idea Likes
FIX 680!!!! 680 from Walnut Creek to San Ramon is an absolute nightmare every
single weekday. They recently added a lane in San Ramon but that is not
where the problems are... getting thru the Walnut Creek interchange and
going for 5 lanes to only 3 is a joke. And then trying to get thru the Alamo
section is just as bad. They need to remove the carpool lane until they can
have 4 lanes of regular traffic for regular commuters. Some days it takes
me OVER ONE HOUR to go 12 miles from Crow Canyon Rd to my home in
Walnut Creek. That is entirely not acceptable and something has to be
done!
0
LOCAL STREETS
Improve Ygnacio
Valley Road
coordinate the traffic signals on Ygnacio Valley Road - 9
Smooth out Pine
Hollow Rd and
Ygnacio Valley Rd.
Pine Hollow Rd has been patched and cracks have been filled. However, it
gives my kidneys a real jolt as I drive it's length. The same goes for
Ygnacio Valley Rd from Kirker Pass to Walnut Creek. The commute down
Ygnacio has doubled commute time. Busses, better signal timing and
alternate forms of timely transportation is needed.
3
Ygnacio Valley Road
Feasibility Study?
I like the idea of SOMETHING being done to reduce congestion -
something along the median sounds like a plausible idea to me. Please
tell me the higher-ups are at the very least considering...something.
3
Helping Contra
Costa cities to “Fix It
First”•
CCTA’s “Fix It First” program ensures that local jurisdictions within Contra
Costa County receive 18% of gross sales tax proceeds each year as Local
Street Maintenance and Improvement Funds, to be spent on the
maintenance of local streets and roads. These funds are used to help fix
local roads and allocations are used by cities to help repair and pave local
roads and trails, fix potholes, and improve mobility. In 2013, CCTA passed
along $13.4 million in Local Street Maintenance and Improvement Funds
to local jurisdictions for roadway maintenance.
2
Electric Vehicle
Charging stations
I would like to see Electric Vehicle quick charge stations in every city in
Contra Costa County. To be placed strategically near shopping, dining,
and entertainment areas as well as areas closer to freeways for motorists
traveling longer distances but need to quick charge en route.
1
Synchronize lights! Why is this so hard? Idling at stoplights produces a LOT of pollution and
of course, aggravation. Synchronizing should be a prerequisite for
installing any new traffic light or building any new street. Major arteries
should move cars efficiently.
1
Better access to the
680 freeway from
Moraga
I think that Moraga should have a direct road to 680 on Bolinger Canyon
instead of having all of their cars need to drive up to highway 24 in
Lafayette and then connect to highway 680. I think that a lot of other
Moraga residents would benefit from this because there are a lot of
people who commute to San Ramon and other cities down on 680. Thank
you.
1
20% to local projects Improve local streets, ebart connections, and safe routes within cities and
towns
1
Concord:
Olivera/Farm
Bureau/Babel/Cowell
thoroughfare
I find it difficult to get from the north-western part of Concord to the
south-eastern part of Concord (or vice versa). My idea is to widen and
resurface East Olivera Rd and also the awful (bumpy) Farm Bureau Rd and
somehow connect it to Cowell Rd allowing traffic to reach Ygnacio Valley
Rd. The tricky spot is connecting Farm Bureau to Cowell but perhaps this
could be done along the existing Babel Ln. I realize this is a lot to ask and
0
4-46
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 43
Idea Title Idea Likes
there are existing homes that would need to be demolished (I suppose). I
may be the only one who will like this idea, but I thought I would at least
share it. Thank you for consideration.
Improving Primary
Roads
Primary roads that people take to get to the freeway need to be improved
with the addition of timed traffic lights and improved onramps to keep
cars moving onto the highway instead of congesting the city streets.
0
Tri-Link 239 Connecting East Contra Costa County to I5 is a huge Economic
Development engine for the county. Ending the cul de sac, open up
goods movement and create opportunities for local jobs in East Contra
Costa.
0
Transportation
Transformation -
Solar Road Tiles
May I introduce a new space age true American invention, 'Solar Road
Tiles!' (at least as well as my research has shown thus far.) See for yourself,
www.solarroadways.com. Solar Road Tiles are full of incredible
environmental and economical efficiencies with ingenious practical
applications. Solar Road Tile technology gets rid of all above ground
poles, wires and communications - its all incorporated onto the roadway
and will eventually be blue-toothed into the car dashboard messaging. Its
circuitry is below ground alongside the tiles. The tiles are made of a very
rugged glass type of material and is climate controlled so it never ices or
freezes. They are solar engineered so they are not on the grid. It would be
worth the effort to seriously consider including this technology into our
25 year transportation plan. This is another new method of reducing our
GHG and our county's carbon footprint.
0
Synchronize lights! Why is this so hard? Idling at stoplights produces a LOT of pollution and
of course, aggravation. Synchronizing should be a prerequisite for
installing any new traffic light or building any new street. Major arteries
should move cars efficiently.
0
Local Streets -
curbing violators
Street safety and curbing drivers violating the laws is imperative. NE
Richmond needs more speeds bumps, stop signs, roundabouts, etc. Items
that'll help to enforce the speed limit and folks to respect pedestrians and
bicyclists. Need more police to enforce the traffic laws.
0
Traffic calming on
Olympic near Newell
I live near Olympic intersection and have witnessed a number of
accidents, including a truck coming through our hedge and taking out
both of our cars, another crashing through a fence, and the death of a
bicyclist and severe injury of another who were just waiting at stop light.
The no turning into Newell from Olympic needs to be improved as well
since when the shadows are just right, the barrier can't be seen. Most
accidents seem to stem from speeding on Olympic and/or illegal turns
into Newell.
0
Accelerate
completion of Hwy 4
through Antioch
When I lived in Los Angeles, incentives were paid to contractors to
complete work early. The overall cost was often less than what would have
been spent, although over a shorter time frame. I think it would be well
worth it to ease traffic and reduce accidents on Hwy 4.
0
Better traffic light
synchronization
along Ygnacio Valley
Rd
Synchronize traffic lights along Ygnacio Valley Rd to allow for a smoother
flow of traffic, especially along the bottleneck between Bancroft and Civic
in the mornings. NO bike lanes or bus-only lanes on Ygnacio - the existing
lanes don't provide enough capacity for existing demand.
0
Ygnacio Valley Traffic I believe a real solution to traffic congestion on YVR is to build a
MONORAIL running from Oak Grove to BART. There appears to be
enough land to build a very large parking facility in/around Oak Grove. A
monorail is elevated & reverses direction. While there is no inexpensive
0
4-47
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 44
Idea Title Idea Likes
solution to traffic, monorails are proven to be SAFE,FAST,COST EFFECTIVE
and GREEN. Oh - and they're quiet! Anyone wanting to explore this idea
can go to www.monorails.com
Widen Morgan
Territory Road
Morgan Territory Road is one of only 3 north/south routes in the county,
but it is so scary, that people are afraid to drive it. The fact that few people
use the road is not a good reason to not spend money on it. It will not be
used much until it is improved.
0
Highway connection
between East County
and 580
Complete Highway 239 0
Improve
680/Highway 4
Interchange
Improve safety and decrease traffic jams. 0
Traffic Circles I helped design and pushed for inclusion the Traffic Circle at 30th and
Clinton in Richmond. We need to identify and place more of these in
Richmond especially in the areas most affected the joy riders and
speeders. It has helped in our neighborhood and can help in others.
0
Widen Vasco Road Eliminate merges on Vasco Rd by making two lanes the whole way from
Brentwood to Livermore
0
Traffic on Olympic Traffic is horrible now, and will only get worse, getting on 680N at
Olympic. It backs up in the turning lane on California and Olympic. Why
can't there be a new right lane for traffic heading east on Olympic that
allows traffic to flow onto the freeway at all times, regardless of the lights.
There seems to be plenty of space there to allow for it. The traffic heading
West turning onto 680N could also use two turning lanes... although I do
not feel that is as important.
0
Vary stoplight times
at trail crossings
On streets with stoplights for trail crossings, provide buttons for walkers,
joggers and bicycle riders with appropriate timing for each. Presently,
when a bicyclist crosses, motorists wait for what seems like two minutes
until the light turns green.
0
Gratis Bridge Access
Once a Week
The San Pablo Bay area encompasses 2 Congressional Districts (arguably
5). Commerce between cities is impaired by Bridge Tolls. We should be
promoting our local business rather than isolating them. Give us
opportunity to cross the 3 SP Bay Bridges and enjoy our SP Bay Cities
once a week gratis. Perhaps on weekends only.
0
Vans & Mini Buses Replace or supplement existing bus service on major arteries (Treat Blvd,
Clayton Rd., Concord Blvd) with vehicles that can carry 6 - 10 passengers.
0
Reversable Toll Lanes
680N & 680S
Add a reversible toll lane system along I680 between Concord and Dublin
similar to the project proposed for I575 Northwest Corridor in Georgia.
http://youtu.be/XsDFAmSLyGA
Add lanes that can run in the heavy traffic flow direction as it shifts from
AM to PM
0
YGNACIO VALLEY
ROAD!
I live 1.5 miles from the freeway off of Ygnacio Valley Rd. Most mornings
it takes up to TWENTY MINUTES to go that 1.5 miles to the freeway.
Something has to be done to keep the East County commuters out of our
cities and on the freeway... there is no way all those cars are only from
Clayton, Concord and Walnut Creek. it is completely absurd that there is a
line of cars on my street up to 12 at times waiting to turn onto Ygnacio
then it takes another 10-15 minutes in a parking lot to travel a mile to the
freeway.
0
4-48
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 45
Idea Title Idea Likes
OTHER
Swap Out Bullet
Train for ET3 for All
the Right Reasons!
The Bullet Train is 30 yr old technology and will be 50+ yr old techno
when fully integrated. ET3 - Evacuated Tube Transportation Technology is
International cutting edge space age technology and is 1/10th the price
tag to the Bullet Train. It can be installed for the price of one freeway lane,
accommodate 4 passengers per 5 ft. capsule and travel at speeds of 375
mph. It is expected to eventually reach entire planet accessibility at
upwards of 4000 mph - travel from New York to Beijing in 2 hours. ET3
can provide 50 times more transportation per kWh than electric cars or
trains. USA must jump into this race for integrating new technology
immediately or be further left behind by other cutting edge nations.
www.ET3.com
1
Increase bike
facilities
Allowing Bikes on buses and BART are a great way to increase public
transit use by allowing trips to be completed totally without a car.
However, roadway improvements are needed to improve bike safety and
improve cycling participation.
1
W-BART - west
county passenger rail
extension needed for
transportation equity
in county.
The western contra costa cities such as Richmond, San Pablo, Pinole,
Hercules and Rodeo/Crockett have not received the same degree of
attention as Central and Eastern county cities in terms of transportation
infrastructure and future investment. In the case of E-BART, for example,
construction is already underway and set to debut this decade -passenger
rail service extending all the way from Pittsburg through Antioch onto
Brentwood. However, Western Contra Costan cities along he I-80 corridor
experience some of the worst traffic not only in the state, but the entire
country. Many of these cities have maritime and industrial legacies from
the world war era (ie Shipyards Richmond, Herucles Dynomite, Refinery
Rodeo, C&H Crockett, etc) and existing infrastructure to improve on
within the urban core of Bay Area. It is important to consider that these
cities have been paying into the BART system tax since its inception in the
70's (far before many of the bedroom communities and tract housing
suburbanization of eastern contra costa occurred in the 90's). At the very
minimum- initial studies, EIR, and planning alongside BART & CCTA &
Union Pacific & BNSF for a western county extension of passenger rail
service is far long over due. Many of these western county cities are highly
transit reliant with much of our county's poverty being concentrated this
area. Expanded rail service would benefit this population and the region
greatly as I-80 becomes a parking lot as predicted by the MTC in the
decades to come. WETA / SF Bay Ferry has considered a ferry station in
Hercules, however, the dredging (combing back of the bay) needed in
such a shallow part of the Bay would exceed in costs tremendously.
Richmond, which already has a deep water port - should be prioritized for
Ferry service as the Craneway Pavillion (Ford Factory), Rosie the Riveter
National Park, Lawrence Berkeley National laboratory and Richmond
Marina districts are further developed in the Port / Ferry vicinity. Please
contact me for consultancy as my education is in urban geography and i
am a lifelong resident of western contra costa county
1
we the peoplej Ferries to San Francisco and Martinez , and dog parks also sound walls not
only for safety from dogs getting out of fences that are broken and biting
people. But makes are community looking better. Improvements to are
0
4-49
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 46
Idea Title Idea Likes
trails and paths
Goal 4 Addendum Maintain the transportation system, and integrate newly developed
advantageous technology.
0
Fulfill Goal 2 "Manage growth to sustain Contra Costa's economy, preserve its
environment and support its communities."
Plan to invest in and integrate new technologies
1. ET3 - Evacuated Tube Transportation Technology
2. Install Solar Road Tiles throughout the county
3. Integrate carplanes above existing ground traffic
0
Sustainable
Economically
"Sustainable" is an economic workd to me. If we can't sustain it, even
when tax revenues decrease, we shouldn't do it. Most of all, let's maintain
and repair what we have FIRST.
I would love to see Contra Costa County get involved with Smart Towns.
http://www.strongtowns.us/membership.
0
W-BART - County
Wide Infrasturcutre
Spending Equality
The western contra costa cities such as Richmond, San Pablo, Pinole, and
Hercules have not received the same degree of attention as Central and
Eastern county cities in terms of transportation infrastructure and future
investment. In the case of E-BART, for example, construction is already
underway and set to debut this decade -passenger rail service extending
all the way from Pittsburg through Antioch onto Brentwood. However,
Western Contra Costan cities along he I-80 corridor experience some of
the worst traffic not only in the state, but the entire country. Many of
these cities have maritime and industrial legacies from the world war era
(ie Shipyards Richmond, Herucles Dynomite, Refinery Rodeo, C&H
Crockett, etc) and existing infrastructure to improve on within the urban
core of Bay Area. It is important to consider that these cities have been
paying into the BART system since its inception in the 70's (far before
many of the bedroom communities and tract housing suburbanization of
eastern contra costa occurred in the 90's). At the very minimum- initial
studies, EIR, and planning alongside BART & CCTA for a western county
extension of passenger rail service is far, far over due.
0
Work with County
and City Planning
Departments
The current zoning/land use system is feeding the traffic problems (homes
here + business over there = more driving!). Please work with all county
and city planning departments to encourage mixed-used neighborhoods
that will support walking and transit ridership. This would greatly reduce
unnecessary driving if people had more local services (grocery stores,
small retail, restaurants, etc.) within walking distance of their homes. For
those of us that have to commute, please work with all transit operators
to expand neighborhood bus service to help shuttle more people to/from
BART for work.
0
PEDESTRIAN
Bike & Ped
connector between
Iron Horse Trail and
Pleasant Hill at
Willow Pass Rd.
I live along Contra Costa Blvd. near the busy intersection of Willow Pass
Road and the I-680 on/off ramps. Currently there is no safe or short-
distance way for me to reach the Iron Horse trail without having to go
over a mile south to Monument Blvd to cross under I-680. I think it would
be a nice addition to help better connect Pleasant Hill, Sun Valley Mall
and Concord with a safe pedestrian/bike connector at or near Willow Pass
Rd and I-680. Even having a safe crosswalk on at least one side of Willow
Pass Rd. to go across the I-680 on/off ramps would be beneficial.
5
Sidewalks Streets like Cowell Road are a joke. It's like a freeway and there are NO
sidewalks. That may have been fine in the 60's, but it's not any more.
4
4-50
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 47
Idea Title Idea Likes
Bicycles and
pedestrians
everywhere
Add more bike/pedestrian bridges like the one over Treat Blvd. Add more
bike lockers at BART so everyone can find out the benefits of biking to
BART. Enhance all bike and pedestrian routes to schools so that parents
stop driving their kids in cars. Kids can walk or bike a mile or more - this is
CA - the weather is great all year round! Encourage "walking buses" where
kids who live far from school start walking and as they pass other people's
houses more kids join them. If the kids are young an adult or older kid can
walk with them.
4
Grant funding for
complete streets
intersections
http://www.protectedintersection.com/ 2
Improve Walkability We should create more direct walking paths to BART stations. Allow
pedestrian paths through cul-de-sacs that are in the walking path toward
BART stations. Do not have a single road without a sidewalk. As a
pedestrian, there are still many places where I have to share the road with
cars because there is no sidewalk.
2
Improve Pedestrian
Safety Downtown
Reduce speed limits through downtown Walnut Creek to discourage use
of downtown streets (Broadway particularly) as a thoroughfare to and
from the freeway during heavy commute traffic hours.
Install stop signs at crosswalks in and around downtown. The pedestrian
crossing signs aren't enough to make street crossings safe because most
cars don't stop for pedestrians at these crossings unless the pedestrian is
already in the cross (ie. a pedestrian can be left sitting for five minutes
before a safe opening in traffic allows them to cross without praying
drivers are looking for and have seen them). Specific location examples:
Lincoln at N. Main, Civic at Carlback, Civic at Arroyo.
1
Invest in Sidewalks
and Better
Pedestrian Access
Too often in Central County main roads from neighborhoods to business
districts have no sidewalks or walkable, level shoulders. This is a
disincentive to walking and poses an increase risk to those who do choose
to walk. It's no picnic driving these roads either because of people are
walking in the travel lane.
1
Access to Parkmead
Elementary School
Provide walk/bike access from the north side of Olympic in order for
children to attend school at their neighborhood school Parkmead
Elementary. Currently the only access point at the intersection of the off
ramp from 680 and Olympic (north side of Olympic) is the only access
point to walk/bike to school. This access point has been closed off
multiple times with a fence, forcing parents to have to drive their kids to
school. I enjoy walking my kids to school and would like to have a path in
order to do this continuously. It would also be nice to have a continuous
sidewalk to the school from Olympic.
1
Walter Costa Trail--
Crosswalk needed
The Walter Costa trail runs from the Lafayette reservoir, across mt diablo
and up into the hills of Happy Valley. A pedestrian crosswalk across Mt
Diablo at this location is sorely needed. While the speed limit here is
35mph, this is right at the transition from 45mph to 35mph and I routinely
see people and dogs trying to race across the street here, with traffic
speeding by and people entering and exiting the reservoir.
1
Lafayette EB Mud
trail
Not sure what happened to this trail, but at one point, there were plans to
extend the trail from the bart parking lot/downtown lafayette to go
behind the veteran's building. Would love to see this extended and, if
possible, bring it all the way to intersect with the trail near the reservoir.
Even better would be to connect this to Ironhorse trail
1
4-51
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 48
Idea Title Idea Likes
Clean and safe
walking paths
We live in BayPoint and my wife and I love going out for a walk every day.
The walking trails are great in keeping pedestrians away from moving
traffic.
The only problem is broken glass on the trails. Sometimes it covers the
trail from one side to the other. Children and animals walk these trails too.
Is it possible to have a street sweeper clean the paths once in a while?
0
Complete San
Francisco Bay Trail
Funding is needed to complete the San Francisco Bay Trail to Point
Molate and the rest of the Point San Pablo Peninsula. Completion of the
planned Bay Trail between the Richmond/San Rafael Bridge toll plaza and
the combined AC and Golden Gate Transit bus stop at Castro St. &
Tewksbury Avenue will be a key corridor for the Bay Trail across the
Richmond/San Rafael Bridge also.
0
More sidewalk
construction
Many roads in the city of Oakley need sidewalks. Sections of: Empire, Main
street, Oakley road
0
Shrink cities Use area plans to encourage infill and transit friendly development. Plan
roads and transportation compatible with a pedestrian-friendly future.
0
Crosswalk lighting in
Kensington
I would like to see crosswalk lighting installed at the intersection of Colusa
Ave and Ocean View Ave. This is a very dark crosswalk on a major street
0
PROGRAMS FOR SENIORS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
Keep car -free streets
accessible to the
disabled
Not everyone can walk and studies have indicated that scooters are bad
for one's health; therefore "car-free" streets must be exempted by
disabled to be equal and fair.
0
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS
Improving Bicycle
and Pedestrian
Safety for K-12
Students
Providing safe ways to walk, bicycle, ride the bus or carpool to school can
benefit our children and our communities by encouraging physical
exercise and reducing congestion around schools. In 2011, CCTA received
funding to understand what projects and programs are needed to provide
Safe Routes to Schools (SR2S) in Contra Costa and how much it will cost
to provide them. This work builds on the existing programs that Measure J
funds, including school bus programs in southwest Contra Costa, student
transit passes, and new crosswalks, sidewalks, bike parking and other
improvements throughout the county. Read more about CCTA’s
investment in SR2S programs and projects <a
href="http://www.ccta.net/_resources/detail/19/1"
target="_blank">here</a>.
18
safe to school With 3 boys in school and no school bus the cost is enormous to get the
boys to school and the walk is 3 miles each way. Bay Point to Pittsburg
High School and LMC by 8am and a single working parent that has to be
at work also by 8 am.
1
Catwalks installed by
Adams & Heritage
High Brentwood
Every year, kids get hit, traffic is congested due to driving volume and the
fact that the middle school and high school start/let out at similar times.
Catwalks at Balfour and West Country Club Drive/American Avenue would
protect our kids, cut down on traffic jams and virtually eliminate the need
for multiple crossing guards. It makes good sense from a safety and traffic
0
4-52
List of Comments on CTP from Online Tool Page 49
Idea Title Idea Likes
flow perspective and would pay for itself in a very short time. Kathryn
Sibley
Light pollution Cities across the nation mandate simple, inexpensive shrouds that keep
the bright lights from banks, car dealers, malls directed onto their
immediate property, not glaring into residents' windows a mile or two
away. Paris recently reduced all city streetlights by 20%.
UN and international university studies show light pollution interrupts
human circadian rhythm, contributes to women's breast cancer.
0
Iron Horse Trail and
Bollinger Canyon
Road Intersection
Provide a catwalk or some safer way for people to cross. There is a ton of
traffic here, especially with all the new housing. I was almost hit by a car
that ran through a red light recently. I want parents to feel safe sending
their children via this route to K-12 schools along the Iron Horse Trail. I
know that most fear this crossing and that prevents them from allowing
their kids to cycle.
0
4-53
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 1
CTP Public Comments Packet for RTPCs
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Main Issues
Table 1 Summary of the Main Issues Raised - All Public Comments
A list of the main issues that arose out of the public participation process.
Summary of Issues
Table 2 Summary of Issues Raised at RTPC Public Workshops for the Draft CTP
Includes a summary of the issues raised by the public during the RTPC Public Workshops.
Table 3 Summary of Issues Raised - Other Public Comments (emails, online comments, surveys)
Includes a summary of the issues raised by the public through other participation means.
Record Log of All Comments
Table A Record log of all spoken comments at RTPC Public Workshops for the Draft CTP
Table B Record log of all emailed comments on Draft CTP
Table C Record log of all comments from CCTA's "Transportation Priorities and Bright Ideas" Paper Survey
Table D Record log of all letters about the Draft CTP received from agencies and organizations
1. Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014 and letters received as of October 28, 2014.
2014 Draft Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Please note:
2. Public comments that were submitted online via the 2014 CTP "Talking Transportation" website are
available at www.keepcontracostamoving.net.
4-54
Table 1 - Summary of the Main Issues Raised - All Public Comments
Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014 and letters received as of October 28, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 2
1.01 Concern regarding congestion across the County on arterial corridors and
highways, especially I-680, I-80, SR-24, SR-4, and Ygnacio Valley Road.
Freeways;
Arterial/Roadway
1.02 Strong support for transit expansion down the I-680 corridor between Central
County and Tri-Valley (ideas include express buses, light rail, BART).
Freeways; Rail,
Rapid Transit; Bus
1.03 Strong support for road improvements across the County, to improve road
conditions and reduce congestion, particularly in West County (arterial roads and
highways), Central County (Ygnacio Valley Road, Olympic Blvd), and East County
(Vasco Road and SR-239/Tri-Link).
Freeways;
Arterial/Roadway
1.04 Strong support for expanded parking facilities at BART stations across the
County. Strong support for expansion of park-and-ride lots and shuttles running
to BART stations. Particular areas of concern: Orinda BART; Lafayette BART;
West County urban areas of El Cerrito, El Sobrante, and Richmond.
Rail, Rapid Transit
1.05 Strong support for BART extensions in East County (to Brentwood) and West
County (to Hercules). Strong support for Amtrak service expansion, especially
between East and West County.
Rail, Rapid Transit
1.06 Strong support for providing transportation for students to and from school and
for improving safe routes to school, to allow more students to walk and bike.
Safe Routes to
School;
Bicycle/Pedestrian
1.07 Strong support for bus service expansion and improvements across the County.
Requests include improved amenities for passengers at bus stations and stops;
longer service hours (earlier in the morning and later in the evening); expanded
routes through neighborhoods; use of smaller buses that are quicker and more
efficient; more frequent service on routes; and improved connections to other
buses as well as BART.
Bus
1.08 Strong support for express buses across the County (especially between East
County and Central County; Martinez and Walnut Creek; West County and
Lamorinda; and West County and the East Bay).
Bus
1.09 Strong support for ferry service to/from East, Central, and West County
waterfronts.
Ferry
1.10 Strong support for extending, connecting, and widening bicycle and pedestrian
facilities (trails, paths, sidewalks, crosswalks, and overcrossings) across the
County. Strong support for: Iron Horse Trail, Lafayette-Moraga Trail, Contra
Costa Canal Trail, Delta de Anza Trail, San Francisco Bay Trail.
Bicycle/Pedestrian
1.11 Concern about lack of goals/performance measures and levels of funding for
bicycle and pedestrian projects (specifically compared to roadways and highways).
Bicycle/Pedestrian
1.12 Strong support for innovation and technology use in the County's transportation
systems.
Innovation
1.13 Concern about climate change; concern about conformance with Plan Bay Area.Plan Bay Area
1.14 Some confusion about how the CTP is implemented, how decisions are made
about what projects to prioritize, and how funding decisions are made.
Funding
Issue #Issue Summaries
Issue or Project
Type
4-55
Table 2 - Summary of Issues Raised - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Sorted by RTPC Meeting, then Issue or Project Type
Includes spoken comments at RTPC CTP Public Workshops through September 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 3
SWAT CTP Meeting
2.01 Concerns expressed regarding traffic congestion on I-680.Freeway
2.02 Strong support for a second Transbay Tube to increase BART capacity.Rail/Rapid Transit
2.03 Request for increased funding for student transportation.Safe Routes to
School, Bus
2.04 Support for "feeder" parking lots with shuttle buses to increase BART use
and efficiency.
Bus
2.05 Support for extended bus service, potentially using smaller buses that can
service neighborhoods.
Bus
2.06 Support for increased funding for ferry service in Richmond and other
locations, with longer daily operating schedules and cheaper fares.
Ferry
2.07 Strong support for increased funding for improving pedestrian and bicycle
access, infrastructure, and safety (including protected bike lanes and
separated bike paths).
Bicycle/Pedestrian
2.08 Concerns expressed regarding potential sales tax increase versus percentage
currently dedicated to SF Muni funding.
Funding
2.09 Request for more "smart" technology infrastructure improvements.Innovation
TRANSPAC CTP Meeting
2.10 Concerns expressed regarding traffic congestion on I-680.Freeway,
Interchange
2.11 Strong support for public transit down I-680 corridor, between Walnut
Creek and Dublin.
Rail/Rapid Transit,
Bus
2.12 Strong support for increased BART capacity and improved service, as well as
increased parking and shuttles to/from BART stations.
Rail/Rapid Transit,
Bus
2.13 Strong support for more and improved bus services, including the use of
smaller buses, user-friendly bus routes, and expanded express service.
Bus
2.14 Strong support for increased funding for improving pedestrian and bicycle
access, infrastructure, and safety (including protected bike lanes and
separated bike paths).
Bicycle/Pedestrian
Issue #Issue Summaries
Issue or Project
Type
4-56
Table 2 - Summary of Issues Raised - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Sorted by RTPC Meeting, then Issue or Project Type
Includes spoken comments at RTPC CTP Public Workshops through September 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 4
Issue #Issue Summaries
Issue or Project
Type
TRANPLAN CTP Meeting
2.15 Strong support for future Tri-Link project.Freeway
2.16 Strong support for HWY 4 corridor improvements.Freeway,
Interchange
2.17 Strong support for Vasco Road improvements.Arterial/Roadway
2.18 Support for Byron Airport connections (between Byron Hwy and Vasco
Road).
Arterial/Roadway
2.19 Expressed concern for transportation improvements to improve fire
department response times outside city boundaries (street extensions).
Arterial/Roadway
2.20 Strong support for commuter rail and current/future BART and eBART
extensions.
Rail/Rapid Transit
2.21 Request for review of CTP goals to align with the Governor's "Complete
Streets" program.
Bicycle/Pedestrian
2.22 Request for continued exploration of new innovations in transportation
technology, including solar road tiles and evacuated tube transport.
Innovation
WCCTAC CTP Meetings
2.23 Expressed concern about expanding HOT lanes because they support the
single occupancy vehicle.
Freeway
2.24 Support improvements for trucks and goods movement through West
County, particularly on I-80.
Freeway
2.25 Concern expressed regarding frequent and heavy congestion on I-80.Freeway
2.26 Strong support for improved connections (roads, transit, Amtrak) between
West County and Central County, as well as West County and SW County.
Freeway; Bus;
Rail/Rapid Transit
2.27 Support for mass rail transit innovation - particularly the Richmond
Cybertran International project.
Rail/Rapid Transit
2.28 Strong support for Amtrak passenger rail and improvements to the Capitol
Corridor line.
Rail/Rapid Transit
2.29 Strong support for wBART extension through Hercules.Rail/Rapid Transit
4-57
Table 2 - Summary of Issues Raised - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Sorted by RTPC Meeting, then Issue or Project Type
Includes spoken comments at RTPC CTP Public Workshops through September 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 5
Issue #Issue Summaries
Issue or Project
Type
2.30 Strong support for increased BART capacity and improved service, as well as
increased parking and shuttles to/from BART stations.
Rail/Rapid Transit,
Bus
2.31 Strong support for transportation for students to and from school.Safe Routes to
School, Bus
2.32 Strong support for improved bus service in West County, with increased
frequency of service and more connections within West County and to
other Contra Costa destinations, as well as for express buses to regional
destinations.
Bus
2.33 Strong support for shelters and benches at bus stops and transit stations.Bus
2.34 Support for electrification of buses in Contra Costa.Bus
2.35 Support for express bus to Silicon Valley.Bus
2.36 Support for paratransit in West County.Bus
2.37 Support for ferry service to/from Hercules or Rodeo Ferry
2.38 Strong support for increased funding for improving pedestrian and bicycle
access, infrastructure, and safety (including protected bike lanes and
separated bike paths), both within West County urban areas and across the
region.
Bicycle/Pedestrian
2.39 Support for Carma and other innovations.Innovation
4-58
Table 3 - Summary of Issues Raised - Other Public Comments (emails, paper
surveys, online comments) - Sorted by Project Type
Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 6
Freeways, Arterials, Roadways
3.01 WCCTAC Strong support for arterial road repair across the jurisdictions in West County.
3.02 TRANSPLAN Concerned about Vasco Road conditions and congestion. Support for
designating Vasco Road a state highway (SR-84) between Brentwood and
Livermore to ensure road is maintained.
3.03 Countywide In general, support for HOV lanes across the County. Requests for addition or
extension of HOV lanes: northbound I-680, where SR-24 and I-680 merge, as
well as northbound SR-242 around Concord Avenue, connected by a HOV
connector ramp to SR-4 east HOV lane.
3.04 Countywide Great concern over the level of congestion across the county and the time, gas,
money, etc. wasted on congested highways and streets. Congested areas of
concern: I-80 through West County; Ygnacio Valley Road; the I-680 corridor;
SR-24; Olympic Blvd.
3.05 TRANSPLAN Support for construction of SR-239 to connect East County to I-5.
3.06 WCCTAC Concern about potholes and roadway conditions on I-80, especially from Pinole
through Albany.
3.07 Countywide Great concern over the traffic signal timing at key intersections in the County,
because many lights are not synchronized.
3.08 Countywide Traffic calming efforts supported.
3.09 TRANSPAC Concern about the high level of congestion on Ygnacio Valley Road, and strong
support for building bus rapid transit (BRT) or light rail in the median of Ygnacio
Valley Road.
3.10 Countywide Support for Complete Streets on all streets across Contra Costa.
Rail, Rapid Transit
3.11 Countywide Strong support for giving "local residents" priority at BART parking lots.
3.12 Countywide Strong support for designating BART a Route of Regional Significance across the
County.
3.13 WCCTAC,
TRANSPLAN
Support for rail transit from Richmond to Antioch and Pittsburg.
RTPCIssue #Issue Summaries
4-59
Table 3 - Summary of Issues Raised - Other Public Comments (emails, paper
surveys, online comments) - Sorted by Project Type
Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 7
RTPCIssue #Issue Summaries
3.14 SWAT,
WCCTAC,
Countywide
Strong support for expansion of park and ride lots, and shuttles between BART
stations and park & ride lots across the County, especially from the Orinda
BART station to parking lots in Orinda, Moraga, Richmond, El Cerrito, and El
Sobrante.
3.15 WCCTAC,
TRANSPLAN,
TVTC
Strong support for BART extensions in West County (as far as Hercules), East
County (as far as Brentwood), and to the South down the I-680 corridor
(between Walnut Creek and Dublin/Pleasanton stations).
3.16 TRANSPAC,
LAMORINDA
Strong support BART express trains from certain Contra Costa stops (Walnut
Creek, Orinda suggested) to Oakland and San Francisco.
3.17 Countywide,
LAMORINDA
Strong support for dramatic increase in parking available at all BART stations,
especially in Orinda and Lafayette, for both cars and bicycles.
3.18 Countywide Strong support for BART and transit services in general.
3.19 Countywide Strong support for expanded BART hours, longer trains with more capacity,
and more frequent train service.
3.20 Countywide,
LAMORINDA,
TRANSPAC
Strong support for improved bicycle and pedestrian connections to BART,
particularly in Lamorinda and Central County.
3.21 TRANSPAC,
TVTC
Strong support for more express buses, light rail, or BART - some form of
transit - between Central Contra Costa County and the Tri-Valley area.
Bus, Ferry
3.22 Countywide Support for improvements in bus service. Requested routes include: between
Walnut Creek and Clayton; Walnut Creek and Antioch/Pittsburg; along the SR-
4 corridor, between East County and West County, possibly via the new
Hercules transit hub; running across the Monument corridor to connect low
income residents with necessary services for families; and in the hilly
communities of the East Bay; to/from Clayton; San Pablo Dam Road (to Orinda
BART from West County); between Pittsburg and Walnut Creek; buses to
Marin and Solano Counties; and express buses between Walnut Creek and Tri-
Valley area.
3.23 Countywide Support for increased transportation for students to and from school.
4-60
Table 3 - Summary of Issues Raised - Other Public Comments (emails, paper
surveys, online comments) - Sorted by Project Type
Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 8
RTPCIssue #Issue Summaries
3.24 Countywide Concern that the bus system and service have not been fully restored to levels
and quality typical before the recession.
3.25 Countywide Strong support for buses across the County. Popular requests include: use
smaller buses or vans, extend bus service times (especially on weekends),
increase frequency of service, improve amenities at bus stops, change routes so
they go to essential services like commercial and employment areas, and
improve connections to BART and other buses.
3.26 WCCTAC,
TRANSPAC,
TRANSPLAN
Strong support for ferry service from West County (Richmond, Hercules,
Rodeo), Central and East County (Martinez, Pittsburg, Antioch, Oakley) to
locations around the bay, especially San Francisco (Downtown, Mission Bay,
Pier 39) and Marin County.
Bicycle, Pedestrian
3.27 Countywide Strong support for designating the Iron Horse Trail a Route of Regional
Significance across the County.
3.28 SWAT,
TRANSPAC
Support for connecting the Lafayette-Moraga Trail with the Iron Horse Trail
(Olympic Corridor Trail Study).
3.29 TRANSPAC Support for bicycle and pedestrian overcrossing at Treat Boulevard for the
Contra Costa Canal Trail in Concord.
3.30 Countywide Strong support for adding bicycle facilities and improving existing ones across
the County as a means of transportation.
3.31 Countywide Suggestion for CCTA to add requirement that all RRSs have bicycle facilities.
3.32 Countywide Strong support for more bicycle signs across Contra Costa, particularly at the
ends of trails/paths to direct to the start of the nearest trail/path.
3.33 Countywide Strong support for extending, widening, and connecting bicycle and pedestrian
paths across the county, especially in the east-west direction (between trails
that generally run north-south). Strong support for maintenance and cleaning
the trails and paths. Popular improvements include: between Lafayette-Moraga
Trail and the Iron Horse Trail; between Pleasant Hill and the Iron Horse Trail;
extension of Delta de Anza Trail to the west; between Discovery Bay/Byron to
Brentwood; along San Pablo Dam Road (especially between El Cerrito and El
Sobrante); San Francisco Bay Trail; along Ygnacio Valley Road; in Downtown
Walnut Creek; and in Downtown Lafayette.
4-61
Table 3 - Summary of Issues Raised - Other Public Comments (emails, paper
surveys, online comments) - Sorted by Project Type
Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 9
RTPCIssue #Issue Summaries
3.34 TRANSPAC,
TVTC
Strong support for the Iron Horse Trail - a “major thoroughfare” for many
residents traveling north-south - and improving the trail conditions and
separating pedestrian and bicyclist traffic.
3.35 Countywide Strong support for construction of sidewalks on all streets, but especially on
routes to schools, to BART stations, and to Downtown areas.
3.36 Countywide Strong support for improving safety of pedestrian crossings, perhaps with stop
signs or lights at important pedestrian street crossings (such as on the Walter
Costa Trail across Mt. Diablo; in downtown Walnut Creek; in Kensington; and
in Oakley) and for pedestrian overcrossings at major intersections (such as by
Adams and Heritage High in Brentwood or Iron Horse Trail and Bollinger
Canyon Road).
Other
3.37 Countywide Strong support for transit-oriented development, mixed-use development that
allows housing and employment centers to be located near each other, and
development of walkable communities.
3.38 Countywide Support for CCTA to be progressive in embracing and implementing new
technologies.
3.39 Countywide Strong support for use of Clipper Cards on all transportation systems
throughout the County.
3.40 Countywide Support for transportation programs for seniors.
4-62
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 10
Record Log of All Comments Received
Tables A, B, C, and D + Letters Received
4-63
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 11
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
8/27/14 TRANSPAC Exclusive bike user who lives and works in Concord – asked if there are any plans
for improving safety of bicycle crossings under I-680 at Chilpancingo, Concord
Avenue, and Willow Pass Road. Also stated that he’s interested in safety
improvements for cyclists on the approach to Meadow Lane along Clayton Road
and appreciates the recently completed extension fork of the Iron Horse Trail from
Meadow Lane to Monument Boulevard, and the pedestrian/cycle bridge over Treat
Boulevard. Wants CCTA to allocate budget for promoting alternatives to single
occupancy vehicles instead of spending money to improve and expand highway and
road infrastructure.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC Rides his bike to work every day and takes mass transit – in East Contra Costa
County, single car occupancy is dominant; we need more mass transit and ways to
encourage people to use it. New York City and Boston have made these changes
and it’s time to make them here. Walnut Creek needs more buses, not just during
commute hours, and more BART trains, mass transit and bikes.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC Has lived in Walnut Creek for last 3 years. Grew up in New York City, where they
had buses, and I could leave my home and know that within 10-15 minutes, I could
catch a bus that would take me anywhere. I don’t understand why a community
with as many resources as this one doesn’t have mass transit infrastructure.
Building hi-rise apartments everywhere, with no way to move people around.
When I worked in San Francisco and they were building the BART parking, they
had vans that would take you to and from BART; it could be a van, doesn’t have to
be a bus. If someone’s going to the city, someone has to drive them to BART
because there’s no way to get to BART.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC Also from New York and wants to comment on the existing transportation system.
He’s had bad experiences with customer service at BART and is not pleased; feels
this needs to be improved as much as anything else. He has had to stand on the
platform for too long and customer service was no help. As another example, there
is lots of space wasted and the parking garages are full to the brim; there is a need
for more parking for BART. We also need more bike paths and more options for
those who want to ride bikes.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC From SoCal and went to school here in 1972; remembers how beautiful I-680 was
and now it’s a mess like L.A. There should be a very general goal of maintaining the
transportation system. This area needs more mass transit, with better routes and
more user-friendly, including a lot of express buses. If you ride a bike from Sun
Valley, you take your life in your hands, and the bus takes too long. There should
be parking lots off of Clayton Road to take folks to BART and decrease traffic. I
hope the message is clear that we really want to improve the mass transportation
system.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC Wanted to point out how many folks came by bike to the meeting tonight and say
that we need better bike infrastructure; other cities and some countries are way
ahead of us – and they have a better quality of life. I would love to see that for
Walnut Creek and Contra Costa County.
4-64
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 12
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
8/27/14 TRANSPAC Lots of bike comments and the younger generation. Strong advocate for protected
bike lanes and believes there is a persistent thought that they’re for increasing the
speed at which people move on bikes. As a solo individual, he will ride his bike to
work and everywhere, but would be more comfortable taking my wife and kids on
bike rides if there were protected bike lanes.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC Thanked the CCTA staff for the presentation and the goals, but the numbers in the
transportation plan show the majority of funding going to roads and highways and
this needs to be re-prioritized to include more public transportation. No traffic
management technology listed either and I would encourage that. I’d also like to
see parking tied to development. We need safer pedestrian and bike lanes because
people who are walk and ride bikes spend more than drivers overall and it’s in the
County’s best interest to accommodate them.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC I’ve used public transit all my life and Walnut Creek’s system is not good because
the bus routes don’t connect well, and we have to wait an hour for connecting
buses. Also, the safety factor is number one; no matter what our ages, from pre-
school to seniors and the areas where we wait should be safer and more protected
from the elements, rain, heat or cold; and people come first. People in cars are
protected, and pedestrians need that same level of protection. If the system were
improved, more people would use public transportation.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC I live in Concord, and have been a Contra Costa County resident for 38 years.
Great accomplishments with the Caldecott Fourth Bore and other extensions, but
the commute issues have become very serious. It takes me 60 minutes to go just
18 miles. Some kind of public transit going down I-680 would help the majority of
commuters.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC I have 3 very specific requests – the way the public transit cares about people
needs improvement. I see people waiting for 20 minutes at Oak Road and people
doing their grocery shopping at Trader Joes, waiting in the rain and the hot sun.
We need to remake the system. When you are a pedestrian or a bicyclist, you see
things from a different perspective. I go from here to the farmers markets and I’m
working hard to dodge people in cars and we need to have more respect for
people on foot and on bikes. We need to make transit friendlier and fix the
sidewalks. If you are in a wheelchair or can’t walk, there are portions of some
roads where there are no sidewalks. We need these things fixed so we can have
the transportation network we need.
4-65
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 13
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
8/27/14 TRANSPAC I can ride my bike faster than the cars move in traffic and the problems with the
park and ride needs to be improved. If you could take a bus there, that would be
good. It’s hard because people don’t want to park their cars there. The cheaper
option is to improve the bike and pedestrian options. There are also kids being
driven to school, which takes up space on the roads, when these kids could be
riding a bike. Focus on pedestrians, and on relieving congestion on I-680 through
the use of carpools. Also, if BART had a monthly or daily pass rather than making
people pay individually per trip, people would use it more often and on the
weekends.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC As one of the leaders of Bike Walnut Creek – feels the vast majority of money is
being spent on drivers and highway improvements. Let’s get people out of their
cars and create more protected bikeways. If you don’t keep building more capacity
on the freeways, people will find other ways to get around.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC We have to improve bike and pedestrian safety because even jogging out of a
driveway can be dangerous. There should be more buses so people don’t have to
wait so long; seniors especially; and the bus rides are so long. If there was more
community information about better transit options, more people would use it.
We need to increase funding for this in Walnut Creek. MTC did increase funding
for more bike and pedestrian transit options and that’s what we need.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC In San Francisco, the new bus shelters tell you when the next bus is coming.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC We need to expand service and increase BART use, as well as establish more
efficient transportation systems, for buses and ferries.
8/27/14 TRANSPAC I’ve lived in Walnut Creek for 40 years, and I come from background of city buses,
because I owned one when I got out of the service. We need smaller buses for
Walnut Creek, if I take the bus downtown, I don’t want to have to wait 2-3 hours.
4-66
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 14
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
8/27/14 TRANSPAC I’m from San Francisco and they have private bus services. You can go anywhere in
San Francisco on buses, light rail, and BART. Our family moved to Walnut Creek
38 years ago and when the buses started moving through the county, one would go
north to Buena Vista and work its way to Diablo Valley College. Over the years,
they redirected it, and on the 17th of this month was the last day for that bus. They
took our bus, and now it’s gone. All the people who live on the northwest side,
above the Walnut Creek BART, up to Palos Verdes, have no bus service now. I’m
on 2nd Ave near Buena Vista and split between 2 buses to get to the Walnut Creek
or Pleasant Hill BART stations. The #9 bus goes from the Walnut Creek BART to
Diablo Valley College, then works its way all thru Pleasant Hill to get to the college,
when, if it would instead take the route that the #7 bus used to take, go down
Geary and right on N. Main to 3rd Ave, where they’re building a new apt complex,
it would be better for everybody. I was working on a bike trail map this morning,
but there’s no way to turn the bus around and be able to go out on 2nd Avenue at
the traffic light and make a left. It’s just a loop, with that bus going from the Walnut
Creek BART to North Main Street and it’s not servicing too many people. Still
letting off all the workers on North Main, but dropping people on the other side of
North Main, that would be a quick fix. Without that, it’s a long walk for people to
go to North Main and it’s a safety hazard because there are so many people texting
and driving.
8/28/14 TRANSPLAN Community Development Director for City of Brentwood. Commended CCTA
for having the meeting and said the City supports the ongoing completion and
improvement of Highway 4 and the major improvements for Vasco Road. Stated
that Tri-Link will be a game changer for the entire northeast region and the
Highway 4 corridor and he’s looking forward to future eBART extension into
Brentwood.
8/28/14 TRANSPLAN A Pittsburg resident – thanked CCTA for holding the meeting in Pittsburg. Quoted
statistics from the Communitywide Transportation Plan and compared percentages
of pedestrian and cyclist fatalities, suggesting that the strategy for funding projects
should include consideration of the fatality rates for each mode of transportation.
Stated that CCTA’s goals and strategies need a major shake up with regard to the
list of projects and referred to a description of complete streets as signed into law
by the Governor, to provide safe transit for all users. Stated that every time a curb
or gutter is built or rebuilt in any community throughout Contra Costa County, a
bike lane should be included next to that curb and gutter, or CCTA should not be
putting any money into the project. Said he’s waiting for someone to sue CCTA
over this issue and asked why the law is not being followed, because there are
serious consequences that haven’t been taken into consideration.
4-67
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 15
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
8/28/14 TRANSPLAN On the Contra Costa County Airport Advisory Board – (speaking as a resident)
has owned and operated an accounting practice in Contra Costa County for many
years. Stated that he feels an opportunity to create more access and more jobs in
East County is being missed at the Byron airport and that providing greater access
would go a long way toward alleviating traffic congestion. Also stated that he wants
to see Vasco Rd finished, and with the support of the local Assemblymember,
wants CCTA to help make it a priority.
8/28/14 TRANSPLAN City of Pittsburg (speaking as a resident) – advocating for commuter rail. Stated
that eBART will be at Hillcrest in less than 3 years, and using existing rail lines,
could provide service as far out as Bryon and Tracy.
8/28/14 TRANSPLAN Pittsburg resident – the City planner Joe Sbranti , said we have to get city money in
order to get BART. People out here have been paying for BART for a long time,
and this wouldn’t happen in wealthier communities with a different ethnicity. BART
was supposed to be out here first and would be a very positive thing for this area,
but it probably won’t happen.
8/28/14 TRANSPLAN San Pablo City Council Member and West Contra Costa County resident. Thanked
CCTA for bringing this issue to the people, because it’s important to get this
information out to the community. Stated that the plan for the next 25 years
includes extending BART, which will be very beneficial. In West Contra Costa
County, I-80 is so congested and we’re trying to renew the interest of our elected
officials, so all that traffic can get off of I-80 and we can make it better for everyone.
Learned a lot of innovation in transportation by attending high school events,
because the young people have so many new ideas. Stated that the “ET3”, a vacuum
tube transportation technology, could go 400 mph and travel around the world in 2
hours, and cost less than other rail transportation. Also mentioned solar road tiles,
made of recycled glass, with everything below the roadway, as having incredible
potential. Stated that while it may be expensive to develop these technologies, and
there may be some negativity, it can be compared to when Ford brought forth the
first car.
8/28/14 TRANSPLAN Director of East Contra Costa Fire Protection District (speaking as a citizen, not
for the district). In east County, there are several aspects involved in getting fire
services to where they need to be: dispatch, station locations and the road
network. As the bypass has been improved, that has improved response times. The
zone just outside of city boundary is where most of the arterial roads stop and key
links don’t exist. The completion of Laurel Road from existing bypass to (?), a gap
that will exist once the project in Brentwood is built, from sand creek road to (?)
This would be of great assistance to ambulances. If there could be a combined
effort to encourage their development, this would greatly help fire response in east
Contra Costa County.
4-68
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 16
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/10/14 SWAT Kudos to CCTA. One serious concern I have is that the more people you bring in
with eBART, etc., how will you get those people across the Bay with only 2 tracks?
There was an article in the newspaper this week about that issue. I work with low-
income kids and I’m beat after waiting 35 minutes for BART, but you can’t run
more than 2 trains under the bay due to safety. Must put a stop to BART strikes,
and design and fund a second Transbay Tube; every day we wait it will cost more
money. The voters must have the right to un-elect the people at the Authority and
have officials elected by the people. I very much respect what you’ve done, but a
billion dollars raises my eyebrows. We did not elect our city council members to
deal with these issues. This is a substantial dollar amount and its return to source, if
the city agrees to do what you want. My wife has lived here more than 46 years
and when BART was built, the city was divided in two and there are only two
leaves, instead of a cloverleaf with four leaves and the north Moraga traffic runs
right through the downtown district to get on to eastbound Highway 24. I would
like to see authority fund a study for alternatives that my wife has designed.
9/10/14 SWAT I think the way we could improve traffic, is to start getting some smart stoplights at
Ignacio Valley Rd and Mt. Diablo. Mt. Diablo is a mess. Smart stuff is available and
could be used. More difficult is that BART has gone as far as it should go; we should
be more flexible and put in light rail instead.
9/10/14 SWAT I like most of the programs, especially those designed for growth management.
There was a program that used to be funded called “safe routes to (?). The goal
being that the last (?)… no way to get to the BART station. For the Pleasant Hill
BART, on the West side, people have to cross the bridge and this impedes access.
9/10/14 SWAT Kudos to CCTA. I have benefitted personally from the Caldecott 4th bore and the
school projects, and many of the projects that Mayor Tatzin talked about. One of
the things I’d like to find out about and have CCTA take the lead on, is a
comprehensive plan for school transportation, which is still very frustrating.
Funding for student transportation is unreliable in many jurisdictions, especially for
low-income families, which makes school attendance much more challenging for
this group. Something long recognized by parent groups and others, is the need for
reliable and safe transportation to and from school. I’m hoping that as part of
CCTA’s plan and the various area action plans, that at least within those areas,
there could be a comprehensive plan for this put in place.
4-69
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 17
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/10/14 SWAT I want to acknowledge the elephant in the room; they want to raise our sales taxes
and it will only be applicable to Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. One-eighth of
a percent of what you spend is going to Muni in San Francisco and that needs to be
dealt with. They’re asking for a ¼ cent sales tax. I wrote an op-ed in the CC times
about this last year,asking our representatives to oppose AB1107. We have a leak
in our transportation bucket that’s going to San Francisco. These sound like worthy
projects, but a lot of you are afraid of dealing with San Francisco on this issue and it
is wrong to allow this to continue. There’s no reason why we should be donating
our money to Muni. It’s one thing to use transportation dollars to improve things,
but there’s also a danger in smart growth and transit-oriented development. At the
Dublin BART station, the closest road, Scarlett Drive, was closed off to bike and
pedestrian access and the City put in a truck yard. The politicians have to look at
everything and I would like them to have a dialog about AB1107.
9/10/14 SWAT Very interested in reducing greenhouse gases from transportation, people-friendly
cities, a massive increase in bike paths, including protected lanes. Stated that
Portland, Oregon now has the highest percentage of people who commute to work
by bike (16-18%). Feels there’s only a pittance going to bike infrastructure in
Contra Costa County and there’s a significant reduction of cars on the road when
more people ride bikes. This is one of the least expensive ways to reduce traffic
congestion, but the smallest dollar amounts in the plan are going towards improving
bike infrastructure. The reduction in Co2, which is very significant, will also reduce
health care costs, because riding a bike will make the population healthier. I don’t
like the funding distribution, because a larger portion should go to bicycle funding.
Most people, even if there’s a bike lane, want protected and separated bike paths,
and once that network is built out, you’ll have many more people choosing to ride
a bike or take public transit, if it’s available. Most people in San Francisco don’t have
to go more than a few blocks to reach some type of public transportation. The Iron
Horse Trail is great, but it’s really the only one and there have to be more
alternatives out there.
9/10/14 SWAT Recommends feeder lots with shuttle buses to increase efficiency for BART. Stated
that according to BART, only 15% of people living near BART actually use it. We
need a way to get people to BART, especially when their lots are full. This would
reduce traffic to and from BART and from those driving around trying to find
parking.
4-70
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 18
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/10/14 SWAT I’ve lived in Lafayette for 42 years and I would like to see a trolley running up and
down Mt. Diablo Boulevard every 20 minutes, because you can’t park in
Downtown until after 2pm. I believe BART is practically in overload now. If we
could have more ferries, out of Berkeley and Richmond, and parking for those
ferries, a lot of people would use them, especially if they ran later and weren’t so
expensive. The Bay Bridge will be in gridlock in 5 years.
9/10/14 SWAT Asked if there was any outreach to the business community to explore flexible
employee scheduling and telecommuting.
9/10/14 SWAT Asked if there are other ways (other than phone surveys and attending meetings)
for people to give their input? There are a lot of young people who ride their bikes
and look at things differently. I’m concerned that we’re not hearing from a huge
percentage of the population because they’re not attending these meetings. We’re
really underfunding for pedestrians and bike riders. If downtown were more
accessible, it could be transformative. It’s a destination, that’s why traffic is so bad.
Talking about the need for a 2nd Transbay tube, we need to do whatever is
necessary to get rid of the pinch point; don’t throw the baby out with the
bathwater; just fix the pinch point. I’m in favor of having housing density around the
BART stations.
9/10/14 SWAT I live in the San Ramon corridor, in southeast Danville. Fully 40% of the items deal
with housing, not transportation. I’m confused about why CCTA is talking about
what ABAG is handling. When Contra Costa Bus service started, there was a bus
at the end of our street and that only lasted a week. The neighbors complained and
now the bus is one mile away and I can’t use the bus anymore. I don’t know why
they can’t use smaller buses and bring them into the neighborhoods. The direct
access ramps on I-680 will be a mess, and HOV lanes should be eliminated, because
they increase traffic instead of decreasing it. I want to see BART run on the Iron
Horse Trail. At intersections all over the country, the medians stick out into the
intersection and they force wide turns, this is a problem. Also, we should eliminate
senior discounts on BART because young people shouldn’t have to pay for old
people to ride BART just because they’ve lived longer.
9/10/14 SWAT It’s fun seeing so much enthusiasm at this meeting. I echo the bike comments,
because I ride bikes and I’m one less car on the road. If you build it, they will come,
so if you were investing in safer bike and pedestrian options, you would get more
people on bikes and fewer cars on the road. There are lots of ways to be creative.
9/10/14 SWAT On the I-680 corridor going south, when you hit Livorna Road, the traffic backs up,
and then after Livorna Road, it breaks up again.
9/10/14 SWAT I also want more bike lanes, because I bike to work. I would also like to see BART
express trains into San Francisco.
4-71
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 19
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/10/14 SWAT (2nd comment) Regarding AB1107, I agree, ½ a percent is too much, but if I had a
choice between no support for Muni and having to walk, I would drive instead.
Muni works and there are kids who ride it, so I don’t mind that money goes to
support it. Research is being done on night deliveries; which would eliminate
congestion from blocking lanes; to connect the retail with the trucker and develop
a schedule.
9/20/14 WCCTAC Very impressed with the scope of CCTA’s transportation planning. Main complaint
is that the traffic lights are not timed well in Richmond and cause too much
unnecessary stop and go. I’ve called on Mr. Hughes in the City’s Public Works
Department and he has a speech that talks about vandalism and other “excuses”,
but this issue impedes traffic flow in a major way, causing frustrated motorists,
wasted gas, and is hard on vehicles and an inefficient use of fuel that contributes to
speeding and road rage. There is a gauntlet of unnecessary stop lights in Richmond
and this condition needs improvement.
4-72
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 20
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/20/14 WCCTAC Richmond resident who wants CCTA to bring back the San Francisco bus. There
used to be a direct bus from Richmond to San Francisco, which made it fast, easy
and painless to get there. The train from Richmond to Emeryville is too expensive
for people who work in Emeryville. The 72M is the only bus that goes to Point
Richmond; it runs every ½ hour and originates from Jack London Square, but if a
driver calls in sick, they don’t replace them, so people have to wait an hour or
more to get a bus. They have spent millions of dollars on the BART station, but
they forgot to put in benches for the people who are waiting for those trains.
There is no shelter whatsoever for wind or rain and no place to sit, for buses that
you’re lucky to get after an hour’s wait.
9/20/14 WCCTAC Thinks the CTP document is problematic because the staff’s analysis is
disconnected from the list and the City’s political officials are ignoring the
challenges of today because they believe they can continue widening freeways and
keep things the way they were 30 years ago. Goal is to reduce the climate impacts
from traffic and this plan is the wrong approach, because it will do nothing to
reduce emissions and encourages express lanes for single-occupant vehicles, which
is going in the wrong direction. We can’t widen the highways, because it’s not
feasible. Some small operational improvements can be made, but that should be a
clarion call for drawing the conclusion that we have to change how we develop.
There is some nice language about AB375 and where we live, and making transit
more available, but it’s not based on the land use plan in the CTP. The cities in the
county continue to sprawl and this increases congestion. This isn’t a planning
document, because it doesn’t plan for things like climate change. It’s taken as a
given that things will just continue to get worse. This plan ought to be to get
people off of the freeways. Smartphone apps allows people to get a ride, with other
single-occupant drivers, so if the County took this and ran with it, to get these
carpoolers into the HOV lanes, congestion could be reduced. Instead of
encouraging people to carpool, they are agreeing with MTC and allowing single-
occupant vehicles to get into the HOV lanes. I see Carma as a very low cost
method of improving mobility, and a far more practical solution than waiting for
Google or others to develop a car that drives itself.
4-73
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 21
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/20/14 WCCTAC I hate the parking garage they built in Richmond, there was no problem with
parking, so I don’t know why they built it. I now go to El Cerrito BART, because I
don’t like using the Richmond parking. Amtrak is an existing system that would be
handy for West County, but is too expensive. I still drive and often have to go to
Central County and you can’t get there from West County, which I think is
intentional. I had to go to Red Cross and you can’t get there on the weekend. Our
hospital is closing, so how would you get to John Muir hospital from here? It will
cost you more than $7 one way. It is a big impact; people in this part of the county
do not want to serve on juries because the transportation isn’t available. I worked
for the county and I refused to take promotions because I couldn’t get to other
locations, like Martinez, and so it prevents people from getting good jobs. No
comprehensive plan, we could have Amtrak run from Martinez with some
agreement to lower the fares. The Central County people don’t want West
County people to come there, but we really need to think about how people move
within the county and not just how to get to San Francisco.
9/20/14 WCCTAC Richmond resident, bike and planning commissioner. I haven’t looked closely at the
plan, so my comments are general. Richmond transit plan, general development and
limiting urban sprawl, encouraging people to use mass transit. I’ve lived in other
countries where it was just as easy to use mass transit as cars. If we really want
people to get out of their cars, it should take less time, run more frequently and
cost less. Amtrak could be an option. The bus schedules could be better. Push
those alternatives and get people thinking about it. I’m in favor of bike
improvements and if we can keep making this alternative attractive for young
people, and reward that behavior, it will be better for our health and environment.
9/20/14 WCCTAC I live in El Cerrito, near Stockton Street and San Pablo Ave. I don’t have a car and
live close to a local bus stop, to save expense. Getting on the 72M locally along San
Pablo Ave, to get into Richmond, it only runs every 30 minutes and my
recommendation is for more frequent bus service. I go to church in Pinole and at
the end of the day, the WestCAT service should be running later into the night. On
weekends, the WestCAT J only runs every 40 minutes and starts too late for me to
get to breakfast at the church, so start it earlier and run it later. We need to do
what we can to educate the public about getting on the bus. Make the best
connections, and make stations more convenient for people to get to, so they will
want to ride.
4-74
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 22
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/20/14 WCCTAC Richmond resident and Contra Costa County Opportunity Council member. Thank
you. This is complicated. I’m in agreement with every comment that has been
made. I’m a member of the economic opportunity council, which is a volunteer
organization and one of our big issues is poverty. Transportation for children to
and from school makes a big difference in low income households. We’re trying to
find out more and connect with other groups. There are lots of opportunities for
working together. I walk and bike, so does my husband, and I like the green
projects and want more, more and more! This is a big weekend for climate change;
it overrides everything and should always be in your mind. I want to see how
busing connects because transportation for children has a big impact; when school
is out, there is a lot less traffic. We’ll be working hard on busing for children and
zero-emission buses, why not? With good planning and good thinking through, a lot
can happen, even universal busing for children.
9/20/14 WCCTAC AFSME – union represents thousands of members that work for the county, parks,
BART and AC Transit; I’m speaking on behalf of this family. We need more bus
service in the county. We don’t need more buses to connect to BART, we need
them to go to where people work, where they shop, to schools, we need
expanded bus service, and a quality trained workforce, because there is a problem
in some agencies; paratransit, and some issues with low-income workforce. Young
people and seniors are at risk. We support expanded transit, BART service, cleaner
trains, cleaner cars and adequate staffing. Buses need to go where people use them.
We support getting people off the road, whether they work in East County or
wherever.
9/20/14 WCCTAC Richmond resident – I want to speed our transition from a fossil-based economy.
Over the last 20 years of people using single-occupancy vehicles, it has stayed the
same and this needs to be flipped. In other places, mass transit is cheaper. I would
like to see more incentives for using mass transit, with an emphasis on making
BART cheaper. Electrification of buses, electricity generated by alternative sources
generates less Greenhouse Gases and we need to figure out ways to incentivize
this.
9/20/14 WCCTAC West County rider and supporter of WestCAT. I’m interested in a Hercules ferry,
and it could come into Rodeo, where the water isn’t polluted. The dynamite plant
in Hercules has polluted the water there. We have new houses and the ferry is
very important. WestCAT doesn’t have enough vans for the senior citizens. I have
ridden buses to a ball game in the city and another one to Amtrak; the 30C bus will
take you there.
4-75
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 23
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/20/14 WCCTAC Advocacy Director with Bike East Bay, which was formed when BART said no
bikes. We do have better bike paths now, like the Richmond greenway, but they
need to connect to Ohlone and Bay Trail, more importantly, this plan needs to beef
up the mass transit. More than half the money is going to make it easier to drive.
You have our support in making tough decisions, but we can’t keep spending
money to encourage people to drive. We have some big ticket items, like good
transit service to all the places we need to go in west county.
9/20/14 WCCTAC El Sobrante resident. On Hwy 4, I took over the engineering on that and made the
20 foot embankment, and I think we need more safety thinking. In downtown El
Sobrante, it should be the perfect transportation corridor, with an enhanced 10’
bike lane and CCTA would build parking structures for businesses. There is no
parking on San Pablo Dam Road. As it is now, drivers want to get from one point
to the other and they use any method necessary. We should make it efficient and
stop making drivers anxious. Currently there are people putting dinner tables on
San Pablo Dam Road. Please don’t let the Board of Supervisors make these kinds of
decisions. (He described an accident involving one of his family members) that
happened a result of putting objects too close to the roadway. The County
engineer said they had a traffic study and surmised that the traffic was 32 miles per
hour on San Pablo Dam Road, so they are trying to make it look like it’s safe to
have dinner tables along that road with heavy, fast-moving vehicles. They need
CCTA to kick them in the pants to get them to change, we need to make things as
efficient as possible and go forward from there. You need to think strongly about
that corridor and reward El Sobrante with parking structures, then you’ll have the
perfect transportation corridor.
9/20/14 WCCTAC President of Cybertran International (Start-up company at Richmond UC Berkeley
University Campus) and an Economic Development Commissioner for the City of
Richmond, but speaking as a private citizen. We plan to manufacture rail that will
cost one quarter to a tenth of traditional systems, with a smaller carbon footprint;
each vehicle is an express, which runs on solar and generates 8 times more energy.
We are in the CCTA plan, and prior to ours, there were no programs to support
mass rail transit innovation, only for buses and cars. The thing about electric cars is
that they reduce Greenhouse Gases, but don’t reduce traffic. We have a public-
private partnership and were able to get a program placed in the next
transportation bill, to be passed by senate. We have a delegation going to DC next
week, waiting for appropriations. I want to thank CCTA for hearing us and
including us in their plan. Federal matching dollars will only be available if we have a
stake in it here.
4-76
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 24
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/20/14 WCCTAC Experience as a bus rider – if you stand and wait for a bus and count cars, there are
many more people driving than riding buses, so how can buses be too expensive?
Most of the money goes to bus driver salaries, so we need them to be subsidized.
AC Transit is always scrambling for cash because the money isn’t being channeled
properly. If you look at every car burning 500 gallons of gas per day; we could ask
the state to ration gas or pass a law to not allow driving on Sundays. There is
something wrong with American transportation and we need to start making some
changes. Count the number of people on the bus and look at the difference in gas
mileage between single vehicles and buses. There is an obsession with automobiles
and the intensity of the drivers, and this is a problem.
9/20/14 WCCTAC affiliated with Richmond Coordinating Council, speaking as individual. Many issues
on transportation, some that stick out, like the I-80 ICM project; how much money
is spent telling people how many accidents there are ahead, when there are lots of
radio stations that broadcast this info regularly. The City of Berkeley has told
Caltrans this is what they want and this City holds up the people and backs up the
traffic in 2 counties. Why can’t more be done to make it better for everyone? In
some cities, they spent millions of dollars, just to say it’s too expensive and moved
the traffic from one location to the other. The solution in Phase 2 is unfunded
because no one wants to pay for it. Why are we spending money on engineering
when no one likes it? In El Cerrito, parking spills from El Cerrito into Richmond
because people can’t find parking, but still BART is looked at as the only solution. If
you have something people are willing to use, we should promote it. The County
knows that regarding LOS, they’re not able to maintain it, so they lowered the
level. Because the county couldn’t meet these standards, now others are taking this
approach. This will make it easier for development projects, but traffic gets worse
because of this lesser standard and this won’t improve air quality, or time of travel.
The county needs to revisit this concept of LOS. Lots of talk about how terrible
vehicles are and hydrogen vehicles are being sold in other countries, and this
country next year, but these vehicles will still need roads. There is technology
coming for vehicles which is way beyond what you’re considering now. Buses are a
lot heavier and harder to make it happen. Need to consider what’s coming in 10,
20 or 40 years because once you take that space away, you’ll never be able to
regain it. One needs to consider the economics of bus travel, subsidized by 50%
and that’s why they don’t expand. We need to be realistic. Paratransit buses are
often empty. Likes to ride a bike, but doesn’t want to ride in traffic. Bicyclists in
most cities are only a small percentage, so we don’t need to take away from one to
subsidize the other.
4-77
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 25
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/20/14 WCCTAC Resident of El Sobrante since 2000, with his wife and 2 kids. I grew up in Los
Angeles and with so many cars, it was still easier to get around by bus there than it
is here. I work in San Mateo and it takes too long to use mass transit. There used
to be a bus to the BART station, but they cut that line and the new ones take
forever. I’d like to reduce my commute and I hate driving, but it’s so difficult and
time-consuming that there’s no real alternative. From San Pablo Dam Rd to Orinda
Road, there are people who want to take the bus, but it takes too long.
9/20/14 WCCTAC Richmond resident and founding member of bike committee. I want to echo those
comments about making walking, biking and access to transit easier and less
expensive. Looking at the pamphlet, these things are not getting their fair share of
the transportation dollars. This should be considered a priority, to promote health,
limit climate change and get people where they’re going.
9/22/14 WCCTAC Resident of Hercules by the bay. Started commuting to SF and first started taking
BART, but the real problem is Hwy I-80, so now taking the links bus and it’s
fabulous, I encourage the county to keep funding the links. Also hope to see BART
extended to Hercules, our city is growing, people coming in from other areas and
are taking BART. When are we going to get a ferry? If we can eventually do that,
let’s be smart about that, let’s not dredge on Hercules Point, let’s erect a pier in
the deep water and people can go out to the pier. If they’re not able bodied, we
can have a golf cart transport them to the ferry.
9/22/14 WCCTAC I’m a bike rider, riding all around the county and the Bay Area, and all the bike lanes
always start somewhere and end somewhere, but never connect, and usually leave
you at a dangerous intersection. I don’t know who’s planning these bike routes but
they don’t help because they don’t connect where you need them to connect.
Once you’re on the bridge and there’s no bike lane and no shoulder and you have
to really watch, it’s very dangerous.
9/22/14 WCCTAC Hercules resident – We’re turning Contra Costa County into a better county for
drivers, but what about for trucks? Great to have nice roads for our cars, but we
need to build for industry. There will be higher taxes and no industry to support it.
In Solano County, everyone goes to San Francisco to work. We need the jobs and
money here.
9/22/14 WCCTAC I’m from Brentwood, and I’m uniquely qualified to speak because I worked 20 years
at MUNI and 7 years at BART. Central The most destructive vehicle are rail
vehicles, because they often leave the track, are expensive, and the infrastructure
and maintenance is far and above what you pay for electric buses. I don’t like the
idea of our own rail system. If BART is going to be extended, that’s great, but we
don’t need our own system.
4-78
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 26
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/22/14 WCCTAC Resident of Hercules for 15 years and a member of the Citizens Advisory
Committee for CCTA. Thanked CCTA for bringing this meeting to Hercules. The
history of transportation is that it is the main source of development. Development
follows transportation and we want to ask the City Council and CCTA to develop
more options for trains, buses and also the ferry. Now, according to existing
technology, we have to go to big water, but in some places without big water they
have ferries. There is new development in ferries and when money is provided for
the ferry, the design will be very different. I am in Hercules because it is a nice
community. I lived in Los Gatos for 15 years and when we started looking for a
nice place to spend the rest of our lives....
9/22/14 WCCTAC I talked to George Miller and he said the people of east county wouldn’t vote for a
BART tax in the early 70’s, but we’ve all been paying for it for years in West
County. I think it’s essential to have a plan and these are nice ideas, but they
have a defect. A nice bus system, where are the buses going to drive? Unless you’re
going to create separate lanes for buses, it will create more traffic, and now the
governor is going to allow everyone with an electric car to drive on the freeways.
We need a BART extension because we need something. We need a BART train
that can cross the Bay because the buses have to go through all the traffic. One of
the big problems on I-80 is that it goes all across the country, lots of trucks
transporting commercial products, especially on Monday mornings, the whole right
lane is trucks and they don’t mix well with cars. In New York, they have a special
truck lane. Lots of trucks going to and from the Port of Oakland and that causes
traffic and accidents. The only solution is a BART extension and we’ve been paying
for this for a long time. Other cities have gotten BART before us. There’s a pier
that goes out from Rodeo that was abandoned years ago. The bike trails, I totally
agree, they are dangerous to ride and it would be nice if there was a trail along the
tracks. Not sure about El Sobrante Avenue, the real solution is the BART
extension. Instead of wasting money on hi-tech gadgets. I’d have to see it proven
that this stuff works, pie in the sky ideas. I-80 already overburdened with
commerce.
9/22/14 WCCTAC Hercules resident for last 10 years. Loved the SF bus when I worked there. I would
like to see an express bus from Hercules to Silicon Valley to reduce traffic. Lots of
job growth there and I look forward to being able to take an express bus to work
in San Jose.
4-79
Table A - Record Log - RTPC CTP Public Workshops
Spoken Public Comments
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 27
Date RTPC Comment/Suggestion
9/22/14 WCCTAC Resident of Hercules since 1988, moved here when I was 18 years old. I’ve been
coming to this gym in Hercules for 10 years. I pay taxes. I ride the buses on
WestCAT, I used to catch the bus at the gas station and I wish they could put the
bus terminal back there instead of Hwy 4. They need a food truck and pay phones
in case people need to call for help and their cell phones are dead. We need more
restaurants, because we have all these homes out here. I would like to see the
buses run up Redwood again. We have enough homes, they even shut down the
movie theater to build more houses and now we have to go to Richmond to see a
movie.
9/22/14 WCCTAC Hercules resident for more than 30 years and we’ve been paying taxes for BART,
but we don’t have the clout to get it built and it will never come here. San Mateo
didn’t want to pay the tax, but they got BART. We don’t have the population. We
also need shopping. They have high-class stores and this is a working-class
community. I wish the people in our council would be more practical, so we don’t
have to go to other cities to shop. No one here shops at Hilltop and something is
wrong. We have a lot of good people here, we should build it up and have some
decent places for us to eat and see a movie. I would like to see a light rail come out
here because it’s less expensive than BART. If you take the bus to BART, it’s not
convenient and not safe.
9/22/14 WCCTAC I live in View Point and the most important service is WestCAT, especially for
disabled people.
4-80
Table B - Record Log - Emails Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 28
Date
Received RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
8/14/14 Countywide (none)Supporting BART and the Iron Horse Trail as Routes of Regional
Significance.
8/25/14 Countywide (none)Supports BART, highways, and buses; does not support ferries,
bicycles, or carpools.8/31/14 Countywide (none)Requesting: 1) acknowledge in the Plan that Routes of Regional
Significance also serve bicyclists, not just motorists; 2) all RRSs
should include bike lanes, marked shoulders, or closely parallel
bicycle-friendly streets; 3) concerned that the County's Bicycle Plan
is for recreational bicyclists, not people who use bicycles for their
primary means of transportation, and wants to be sure CTP supports
bicycles as means of transportation, not just leisure.
9/16/14 Countywide (none)Requesting "dramatic" expansion of parking at BART stations, so that
there is always parking available, particularly during the midday.
9/20/14 Countywide (none)Requesting that County Connection replace their full-sized buses
that drive around the county with smaller mini-buses that can move
more quickly and are more appropriate for the number of
passengers that ride on these routes.
9/30/14 Countywide (none)Requesting safe places to ride and park my 3-wheeled electric
bicycle.
9/9/14 LAMORINDA Moraga,
Orinda
Supporting public transit, especially BART. Requesting: 1) more
parking at BART stations; 2) more frequent bus service to and from
BART stations; 3) creating park and ride lots in Moraga and Orinda
(at church parking lot, or other locations) with shuttle buses for
BART riders; and 4) priority for "locals" at BART station parking
lots.
9/11/14 LAMORINDA (none)Concerned about improvements to Moraga Way that are not listed
in the SWAT-Lamorinda Action Plan and suggests a 6-item (very
detailed and specific) list of improvements that should be made. In
summary, proposes to "stop" traffic bound for eastbound SR-24 on
Moraga Way by encouraging the traffic to turn onto Camino Pablo,
instead of continuing down Moraga Way. Requests that CCTA call
him to talk about his suggestions. Also notes that the Action Plan
lists a street as "Overhill Drive" when it is actually "Overhill Road"
and would like that corrected in the Plan.
9/21/14 LAMORINDA Orinda,
Moraga
Requesting: 1) additional parking at Orinda BART station; 2) bus
service at least once an hour for the Bus 6 that runs along Moraga
Road and Moraga Way between Orinda BART and Lafayette BART;
3) BART parking be reserved for local residents.
9/23/14 LAMORINDA Orinda On SR-24, for eastbound Brookwood off-ramp, requesting that off-
ramp expansion be placed to the north instead of to the south, in
order to protect the earthen berm between the exit and the
Brookwood condos. Would like to know what the status of this
project is and current design/plan.
9/26/14 LAMORINDA Walnut Creek,
Lafayette
Requesting connecting the Lafayette-Moraga Trail with the Iron
Horse Trail in Lafayette & Walnut Creek, as described in the
Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study.
4-81
Table B - Record Log - Emails Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 29
Date
Received RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
9/11/14 LAMORINDA,
TRANSPAC
(none)Requesting a new bus line from Lafayette BART to Pleasant Hill
BART area via Deer Hill and Pleasant Hill Road with stops at
Acalanes HS, Reliez Valley Road, Green Valley Rd, Rancho View
Drive.
9/15/14 TRANSPAC Clayton,
Walnut Creek
Concerned about traffic in Central County. Requesting 1) traffic
studies near schools to improve traffic before rush hour; 2) a
dedicated bus system for junior high schoolers that goes to popular
neighborhoods; a shuttle or express shuttle to go from Clayton area
to Walnut Creek and the BART stations, with parking available at
church lots; 3) Add another on-ramp lane from the end of Ygnacio
Valley Road, past the Walnut Creek BART station; 4) make the bus
system less convoluted for commuters.
9/23/14 TRANSPAC Walnut Creek Requesting increased bus service between Walnut Creek BART and
Marchbanks/John Muir Hospital, particularly during the midday.
Appreciates the clean buses, good drivers, and on-time service.
10/3/14 TRANSPAC Concord In Concord, requesting a bus that covers Monument Blvd all the way
to wic at Stanwell Cir.
8/5/14 TRANSPAC,
TVTC
(none)Requesting that the Iron Horse Trail be designated a Route of
Regional Significance.
9/5/14 TRANSPLAN Brentwood Requesting 1) CTP meetings in far east Contra Costa; 2) use of
natural gas for eBART instead of diesel; 3) designating Vasco Road
between Brentwood and Livermore as "State Highway 84" so it can
be maintained to state highway standards and accommodate more
traffic.
9/11/14 TRANSPLAN,
TRANSPAC
(none)Requesting improving and increasing bus transportation between
Walnut Creek/Pleasant Hill and Antioch/Pittsburg, to better connect
residents to jobs.
8/22/14 TVTC,
TRANSPLAN
Walnut Creek,
Dublin
1) In Walnut Creek and surrounding communities, use smaller buses
for fuel savings, run more frequently to neighborhoods, run earlier in
the morning and later at night (until midnight would be great!) and
have better overlap between crossing bus lines and between County
Connection and BART; 2) BART connection between Walnut Creek
and Dublin/Pleasanton/Livermore; 3) Provide a bus from Contra
Costa to Alameda when BART strikes are going on.
8/21/14 WCCTAC Concord Requesting bike “Flyover" at Treat Blvd and CC Canal Trail to make
a crossing for bikes and pedestrians.
9/9/14 WCCTAC Richmond,
Pinole, San
Pablo, Hercules
Requesting: 1) arterial road repair on all streets in Richmond, Pinole,
San Pablo, and Hercules, as well as I-880 and I-80; 2) BART or
Amtrak availability from Richmond to Antioch and Brentwood; 3)
ferry service available from Richmond to San Francisco and
Sacramento; 4) Greyhound and Megabus at the BART station on
MacDonald Avenue.
4-82
Table B - Record Log - Emails Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes comments received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 30
Date
Received RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
9/15/14 WCCTAC Livorna Requesting that 511 include multi-modal alternatives, not just bus
and car but also Amtrak and ferries; better connections on buses
going from Livorna to BART, and more frequent service during the
day.
9/8/14 WCCTAC,
LAMORINDA
Richmond,
Orinda
Requesting bus line from El Sobrante and Richmond to Orinda BART
station.
9/12/14 WCCTAC,
LAMORINDA
Orinda Requesting bus service between Castro Ranch Road and Orinda
BART station. If bus service isn't possible, requesting
carpool/rideshare areas in El Sobrante and at Orinda BART. Also,
requesting road improvements on both sides of Hilltop Drive/I-80
overpass.
9/22/14 WCCTAC,
TRANSPAC
Concord Requesting a bus route starting at Treat Blvd heading along Oak
Park, Meadow Lane, Market Street and looping around over to
Stanwell Drive in Concord. This bus route would allow low income
families easy access to shopping, schools and county services, such as
First Five, Monument Crisis Center, Head Start, La Clinica de la Raza
and WIC.
4-83
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 31
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
Countywide (none)Benches at bus stops
Countywide (none)Jitneys: Bigger than cabs and smaller than vans to travel routes between
neighborhoods, stores, health care, etc. Less fuel; BART, buses, etc. could
have Jitney fleets as well.
Countywide (none)Separated bike paths near or on arterials with electric bike share. Bang for
the buck > freeway widening, by far
Countywide (none)1) No strike clause for public transportation employees - BART and buses. 2)
Additional freeway from East to West. 3) No net population increase! This
could improve air quality…
Countywide (none)Keep roads and highways flowing - time lights - Improve travel times -
commuting is a nightmare! Help!
Countywide (none)#1 Priority should be with 97% of people who access roads with private cars
and not the 3% who use public transportation. #2 Buses should be downsized
or eliminated on routes where passenger levels are low.
Countywide (none)Roads here are unsafe, bumpy, holes all over; maintain roads
Countywide (none)subsidized transportation when buses and BART are not running (at the cost
of bus/BART); taxi? Van?
Countywide (none)Use the U.S. adopt-a-highway concept to clean up residential areas. Provide
"grabbers" for volunteers.
Countywide (none)Put public transportation transit in first place! Use other funding in towards
highways, local street, and so on.
Countywide (none)I appreciate whatever is done to make it safe. Thank you.
Countywide (none)Retired w/ hip and back trouble. Must drive to destinations and freeways are
a disgrace. Fix them!
Countywide (none)Buses are too big, often empty. Bus drivers speeding and inconsiderate by not
using the bus stop provided, use traffic lane instead. BART archaic, noisy ride,
too expensive! Noisy in neighborhoods.
Countywide (none)I was disabled for more than a year recently and it was unbelievably hard to
get to some of my medical specialists in Marin and Sonoma Counties. I am a
senior. Please make it easier. Thank you!
Countywide (none)Buses too big, don't pull over at bus stops and cause congestion. Often going
too fast, very frightening. Double decker BART parking, no charge to park.
Countywide (none)Help maintain bike paved paths
Countywide (none)Make corner-lot residents trim trees and bushes so drivers can spot traffic
approaching right or left. In towns with no street lights, arrange for solar
panels that provide power for porch lights at night.
4-84
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 32
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
Countywide (none)Incentive public transit: lower the costs, increase bus routes and frequency.
Intensify carpool usage thru graduated toll structure or other means.
Disincentivize use of cars - many means to do this.
Countywide Crockett Additional/improved bike paths in/around the Berkeley Hills/Grizzly
Peak/Chabot area would be beneficial. The Contra Costa Canal bike paths
need to be expanded to go beyond highway 4, bike paths in Crockett and
Port Costa area could use expansion. We need more paths like the Iron
Horse Trail to go into Eastern Contra Cost County.
Countywide (none)Remove fare boxes from buses. Hop on - hop off. Fares don't add much to
income when adjusting for expense of cash, ticket, accounting controls. Or,
adopt a clipper card. Smaller more frequent buses feeding to shopping and
BART, safe routes to school double as bike routes
Countywide (none)Oh please - more BART parking
Countywide (none)Replace large buses with vans - most buses are running around almost empty
Countywide (none)My problem is the bicycle riders on the sidewalks because I use my 3 wheel
electric scooter there (per police dept.). Bikes should use the streets, also
incomplete sidewalks.
Countywide (none)Extend BART from Richmond to Bay Point by direct line, it's past time
Countywide (none)California's problem: too many people, too many cars, and too much traffic.
Talk about a rough ride…County Connection buses are uncomfortable; the
seats are too hard, narrow and unsupportive; the upholstery is unhygienic. All
transportation infrastructure, including bridges, should be paid for by tax
dollars. No inefficient bridge tolls! No toll lanes! Thanks!
Countywide (none)More local stops for buses that feed into BART. I have to walk 3/4 mile.
Countywide (none)Commuter trains! No more freeway widening!
Countywide (none)Frequent bus service (during commute hours) that connect residents w/ the
places they work. I live 6 miles from work (UC Berkeley) but would have to
catch 2 buses - and one runs only every 40 minutes!
Countywide (none)1) Improved maintenance of bike paths and roads commonly used by cyclists -
too many dangerous potholes and cracks and uneven surfaces. 2) Better
control of intersections - too many cars run red lights! 3) More interactive
traffic signals - ones that monitor traffic volumes/flow
Countywide (none)I would like new fare boxes. Participate in the RTC Program and fares; AC,
CCTA, and BART should accept this card and fare system. Drivers need to
tell ignorant mothers with baby strollers to stop crowding the aisles (fold it
up and move to the back) their rights don't supersede disabled or senior
citizens
Countywide (none)Listen to your bus drivers a lot more. It will help. We need another 98X on
route since it's been discontinued being an express. Please, all strollers, fold
up. Thank you.
4-85
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 33
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
Countywide (none)No new transportation systems. Improve-expand (as necessary) and make
more efficient our current systems - E-Bart is so wrong. A BART station
would have done the job.
Countywide (none)I would love to see many more bike lanes on street and also protected bike
paths that are connected and signed so people using them will know how far
a place is where they are pedaling to.
Countywide (none)Ferry service expanded to Contra Costa County, Martinez, Baypoint, and
Richmond
Countywide (none)I would like to see Ferry service to the East Bay/SF area.
Countywide (none)Keep the costs down for people with disabilities and seniors
Countywide (none)More bus stops! Even if they are not regularly used - the driver can just keep
moving - what's the problem! I'm 70 and the closest stop is 3/4 mile away -
ridiculous! Why can't you serve the public? Existing bus stops are much too
far apart.
Countywide (none)More midday and later buses so people can use BART during non-peak
hours...higher sales and gas taxes statewide and nationwide to fund
transportation
Countywide (none)Motorcycles should share bicycle lanes.
Countywide (none)Timed signals on major roads to keep traffic moving.
Countywide (none)1) Pedestrian overpasses or underpasses at busy streets; 2) BART needs
competition so it will be forced to improve
Countywide (none)We have gridlock on C.C. roads now, and developers ready to build more
and more houses. BART is bound to extend. Out of the weather, safe bike
storage at Ferries and BART would help.
Countywide (none)Parking availability at existing BART stations, train timing on weekends
Countywide (none)Better care of road infrastructure
Countywide (none)A fleet of small buses - 20 passengers - routes from suburbs to shopping,
colleges, hospitals, etc. A web of stops that would expand the distances for
riders - transfers would be free.
Countywide (none)Can we see County Connection buses use clipper card for fare? If I load my
card other than cash, I check my balance at the machine before entering
BART fare gates.
Countywide (none)No new ideas - am using paratransit bus.
Countywide (none)Make bikers get a license plate and take a test - they are too aggressive and
unsafe. No stops at signs, lights, for pedestrians etc. - make them safe or get
rid of bikes on street!!! Make them take responsibility.
Countywide (none)More BART parking. Free BART parking.
Countywide (none)Our plans and decisions need to be weighed by new environmental impact.
Partnering youth with homebound, disabled, and elderly for transport to
places of recreation, education services and commerce. Get youth and
community involved in solutions. Thank you.
4-86
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 34
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
Countywide (none)BART is now so packed at commute time that I never get a seat! We need
more and longer trains.
Countywide (none)We need sidewalks where there are none. It isn't safe to walk in the road -
and in winter, it's muddy. This is especially true on my street. Better lights
(more) on the street would be nice...Also lights on trains (more of them)
Countywide (none)A clipper card for County Connection buses
Countywide (none)More parking at BART
Countywide (none)Less traffic around schools - key drop off points to avoid gridlock
Countywide (none)Local buses should be smaller due to reduced ridership. The buses could
come more often and be on time. Bus stops/stations should have covered
seating.
Countywide (none)1) BART is great - parking limits it - build additional on land [?] and you could
increase ridership - add solar to the top and lower electricity costs. Forget
creating little villages - your ridership is spread all over. 2) Create bike lanes,
but enforce keeping riders in them; drivers are not the only cause of bike
accidents - riders riding outside lanes are too...see Danville Blvd any weekend
day - I ride too!
Countywide (none)Make public transportation more appealing. Improve bus stops - they need to
have information about routes and times of arrival/departure. Also, they
should have a cover to protect users from weather conditions.
Countywide (none)Encourage local entities to require developers to include electric vehicles
changing stations in retail development.
Countywide (none)Parking!!! Especially BART stations
Countywide (none)A continuous trail linking all trails together - think even bigger like
nationwide!
LAMORINDA Lafayette The Lafayette BART parking is full all the time. We need a Caltrans ride share
parking lot near there. Build more ride share lots everywhere. I would like to
see a free BART/bus along Pleasant Hill Rd/Taylor Blvd.
LAMORINDA Lafayette Leave Mt. Diablo Blvd. from Brown Ave. to Pleasant Hill Road out of the
Interjurisdictional significance designation.
LAMORINDA Moraga Bus service from Moraga to BART - more frequent and accessible bike
routes! Stop allocating so much money to highways and restore bus service.
LAMORINDA Orinda Orinda needs to add more parking at BART. People will pay. BART overflow
is running the business district. City gov't doesn't care!
TRANSPAC Pleasant Hill Bus service (small buses) for Pleasant Hill residents. Main drop-off and pick-up
points; minimally priced; BART and downtown P.H. Paid for by a new city tax
on residents and businesses and a high tax on any new construction.
4-87
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 35
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek Cars and bikes do not interact well with pedestrians. Cars do not see
walkers. Can we create paths along creeks for walking - why is Walnut Creek
called that name? Creek paths closed to people - can we have safe, alternate
walk ways for pedestrians?
TRANSPAC Clayton Increase service and frequency of buses throughout Clayton
TRANSPAC Concord Going west on Treat Blvd and Jones Rd - need a longer left hand turn lane.
Have all pedestrians and bikers use bridge - eliminate pedestrian crossing.
This could eliminate bottleneck there in AM, w/ commuters getting on
freeway north and south. Bike lane on N6 Rd to Mt. Diablo (CCC logo) and
improve N.6. Road to entrance of Park. Mt. Diablo is the symbol and image of
CCC and N6 Rd., needs a facelift.
TRANSPAC Concord Restore Saturday and Sunday buses on Solano Way - older folks without a
care are trapped at home. (Saturday and Sunday are good shopping days)
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek Buses every 15 minutes from BART Walnut Creek to Pittsburg via Ygnacio
Valley Road
TRANSPAC Martinez Ferry service from the Martinez Delta is a must. We all know the 3 Stooges
built SF Bay Bridge, won't last long. What happened to county connection's
plan to service buses to Walmart. Been asking for 5+ years. Thank you.
TRANSPAC Martinez county connection able to run to SF Ferries from Martinez to SF
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek No city bus runs by near me or anything else. I go nuts staying in here all
weekend! Please bring some sort of transportation here!! Even a push cart
will do.
TRANSPAC Martinez,
Pleasant Hill
1) I would like to see a ferry in Martinez. 2) A better bus schedule getting to
Benicia from Pleasant Hill.
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek A good bike lane all along both sides of Geary, and Newell, near Main and
Broadway -- unsafe area for bike commuting
TRANSPAC Clayton I'd love to see BART extended out closer to Clayton
TRANSPAC Martinez Emergency buses from all BART stations needed. During strikes of Bart and
earthquakes that shut the bay bridge down, a full service bus line directly
from all BART stations needs to go into SF. Martinez residents had no bus
access to SF.
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek,
San Ramon
Increase bus service on major links, i.e. #21 from Walnut Creek to San
Ramon to encourage shoppers and commuters. Increase express bus service,
i.e. more between Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill. Extend Clipper card
service to buses.
TRANSPAC Clayton Expand buses to and through and around Clayton
TRANSPAC Martinez More in-road flash lights at crossings. We walk along Canal Trail and Briones.
Mt Diablo Trail Street crossings are in awkward places and/or with street
parking so close to crossing the pedestrian is hard to see till last moment
(Putnam and CLCT; Cones/San Luis and BMD Trail); sidewalks to bus stops
improved
4-88
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 36
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek,
Pleasant Hill
1) Buses run straight, no in and out of areas. 2) reduce bus capacity when
new buses are purchased 3) more parking in downtown WC and Pleasant Hill
and at BART
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek The no. 2 County Connection, until recently, ran 10 buses a day from
Trotter Way to BART and back. Now they're down to 4 a day, leaving
Trotter Way at 6:34 and 7:26 AM and returning from BART at 5:35 and
6:33pm. As a senior citizen who does not drive, my only alternative is to take
very expensive taxis. They should run at least 1 or 2 buses in the middle of
the day to accommodate people like me.
TRANSPAC Diablo The bicycle "cut through" traffic in Diablo is not acceptable! Diablo is a
private community not the gate way to Mt. Diablo. # per year is approx. 50-
10,000 per save Mt. Diablo. It is necessary!!! To construct bike lanes on
Diablo Rd from Green Valley to Mt. Diablo Scenic!! This is necessary for bike
safety and to eliminate private community inversion by bikes.
TRANSPAC Martinez Extend the Contra Costa Canal Trail all the way to the Martinez waterfront.
TRANSPAC Concord Bike lanes in the downtown areas, including sections of Willow Pass in
Concord.
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek The car infrastructure here is terrible. It promotes unsafe driving and makes
Walnut Creek an awful looking town. More walking/public transportation.
Narrow streets! Ygnacio is a nightmare! No more than 2 lanes per street.
TRANSPAC Martinez Not a priority that I checked above, but the planned Martinez ferry will lessen
highway congestion, increase routes to safety in event of an attack or quake,
etc.
TRANSPAC Clayton I would like to see a bus from Clayton/East Concord to Walnut Creek that
does not involve a transfer at Pacheco Hub. Could you use jitney type buses
like they use in SF?
TRANSPAC Martinez We would love to see ferry service from Martinez marina to various
locations. SF and Giants ballpark in particular
TRANSPAC Walnut Creek I live in the Walnut Creek Manor community complex a community of 500+
people 55 and older. There is a huge need to increase public transportation.
Small buses and more of them.
TRANSPAC,
TVTC
Concord,
Walnut Creek
Improve drive time during commute hours on Ignacio Valley Road and Treat
Blvd. My commute, door-to-door from home to work is 8 miles and my
average drive time is 45 minutes.
TRANSPAC,
TVTC
Walnut Creek,
Pleasanton
Bart from Walnut Creek to Pleasanton to San Jose (not via Oakland).
Continuous sidewalks along Morello in Pleasant Hill.
TRANSPAC,
TVTC
Walnut Creek,
Dublin
Currently, have BART connecting WC to Dublin BART. Make express buses
leaving from Dublin BART after 5:10pm. I like the idea of smaller buses
running more often. In the long term, I would like to see some sort of light
rail on I-680 or using Iron horse trail to connect Walnut Creek to Dublin.
4-89
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 37
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
TRANSPLAN Byron Armstrong Rd in Byron needs to be developed as soon as possible. We have
Model T bridges to start on. My driveway was not finished as promised.
Traffic out of control on Marsh Creek Road and Highway 4 to Antioch. Not
enough Highway Patrol coverage. Need electronic signs indicating your speed.
Motorcycles come traveling at very high speed here.
TRANSPLAN (none)I would like to see real BART in East Contra Costa. We have been paying for
real BART for years, and I feel that we should have that connection here.
Other areas [serviced] BART after the initial plan while this area was not
served. Extremely inequitable and unfair.
TRANSPLAN Brentwood I would like to see BART extended to Brentwood!
TRANSPLAN Brentwood Extend BART to Brentwood
TRANSPLAN Antioch Alternative transportation services from Antioch to San Francisco such as
coach buses and ferries. BART should run more frequently than 15 minutes
at Pittsburg/Baypoint station.
TRANSPLAN (none)We would really like to see BART (not parking stations) come to East Bay
County. We have been paying taxes for BART to extend for many many
years.
TRANSPLAN Antioch BART alternatives from Antioch to San Francisco. BART to run more
frequently than 15 minutes. Coach buses, ferry services from Antioch to San
Francisco.
TRANSPLAN Antioch Extend ferry system to Antioch, use County Connection buses to it - they
are empty to BART. Use them for both. Route passes Ferry Site…Ferry
Service - can't both systems be tried?
TRANSPLAN Brentwood Would like a bus to drive down O'Hara in Brentwood. Closest bus stop over
1 mile away. If bus came down O'Hara it would be perfect.
TRANSPLAN Antioch Look up Carson Circuit Transit System. I live 2 hours away from Deer Valley
High School by bus and 15 min by car. This circuit is what most suburb areas
of Antioch could use.
TRANSPLAN Brentwood We need BART out to Brentwood - or at least Antioch ASAP. This should be
your first priority.
TRANSPLAN,
TRANSPAC
Martinez,
Antioch
Quit driving around with empty buses and rework routes and times. A bus
from Antioch to Martinez?
TRANSPLAN,
TRANSPAC
(none)Express buses between Walnut Creek/Pleasant Hill and Antioch/Pittsburg in
the morning and afternoon to enable employees to find and get to jobs and
businesses to broaden their area of potential employees.
TVTC Walnut Creek,
Dublin
On Saturdays, Bus 36 now runs between San Ramon Transit Center and
Walnut Creek BART. Please extend service to Dublin BART on Saturdays.
4-90
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 38
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
TVTC San Ramon Please adjust light and lower speed limit. You should check your disabled
person and other people records. A lot of accidents at Bollinger and
Wedgewood Rd. Elderly lady died recently. 1st people driving through
Bollinger they are speeding, there is school across street. I live at
Cornerstone Apts./Safeway is across street. A lot of people who live here
walk to store. Big problem with lights. 20-seconds not enough to get to the
middle/time is big issue/seniors, children
TVTC Danville There is no sidewalks in Danville on Paraiso Way right on the way to both
Charlotte Wood Middle School and Baldwin Elementary School. How are the
kids going to be safe walking on the streets to school? This should be #1
priority. Thank you.
TVTC Danville Diablo Road in Danville is extremely dangerous!! The area between green
Valley Road and Mt. Diablo Scenic is an area fraught with danger for both
bicyclists and automobiles trying to avoid hitting them. There is essentially no
safe area for cyclists. We strongly urge you to provide additional pavement to
accommodate a bicycle lane and to do this as soon as possible before there
are fatalities.
TVTC Danville, San
Ramon
Smaller buses - large buses are empty and polluting (more). I would like to
use BART but never any parking and does not serve south Contra Costa -
Danville - San Ramon - no more development until traffic issues solved.
TVTC San Ramon I do NOT want any BART stations in San Ramon. We have seen over and
over how this just brings crime into the city. We can get to Pleasanton and
Walnut Creek just fine.
TVTC San Ramon Make County Connection clipper card sales available at more locations and
longer hours. More bike racks on buses…(for 4-6 bikes). Extend route #35
bus through Windemere and Gale Ranch via Bollinger Canyon Rd to Saturday
service due to increase use of high school, library, and domestic help.
WCCTAC Pinole Reroute West Cat to original Line #16 coming up Doidge and down Wright
Ave (changed due to Deaf Child many years ago)
WCCTAC Hercules BART extension to Hercules; bus routes on San Pablo Dam Road to Orinda -
morning commute time and evening return -- especially Sept-June
WCCTAC (none)BART needs to extend to this part of Contra with hub for ferries to SF and
Vallejo.
WCCTAC Pinole Bring BART to Hilltop Mall from Richmond
WCCTAC Richmond Present conditions of bicycle routes endangers safety of riders and
pedestrians. Example -- Barrett in Richmond. In this area, bicycles do not
know how to share the road.
WCCTAC (none)I really look forward to having Ferry boats going to San Francisco and Marin
counties. Also it would be great to be connected to the fast train that's in the
works to Southern Cal. Thanks for asking about our wishes.
WCCTAC (none)Need BART. 45 years paying for it, but no BART!!!
WCCTAC (none)We need Bart -- have paid for it for 45 years!!!
4-91
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 39
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
WCCTAC Richmond [My street] hasn't been paved in 20 years! $5,000 in property taxes, plus gas
taxes all for nothing! It's beginning to look like a 3rd world country around
here! Go to the freeway entrance at San Pablo damn Rd and Highway 80! It's
shameful! I'm in my 60's and must drive to my destination. Walking long
distances and bike pedaling are memories now! It's my $!
WCCTAC Hercules Bart to Hercules/Pinole. More West Cat JPX buses
WCCTAC El Cerrito The El Cerrito program for seniors is so good. I made a determined effort to
stay in El Cerrito. Many of your meetings are at night. I don't drive after dusk -
how can I get a summary of your actions?
WCCTAC (none)I volunteer at C.C. Senior Peer Counseling. What I see is that senior be able
to take buses or transportation to different areas from where they live. From
Richmond to Pinole Senior Center for example: that seniors don't pay $2.50
to park at BART stations
WCCTAC (none)Most important to utilize...Bay for transportation - more ferries. Also if
you're really serious about reducing carbon emissions, more lanes and more
roads so we don't sit in traffic burning gasoline!
WCCTAC Hercules BART to Hercules/Pinole. More JPX from West Cat buses
WCCTAC Hercules Extend BART to Hercules. Add more West Cat JPX afternoon Routes from
3pm. The route go into Hercules Transit CTR from Sycamore should be
straightened, widen pedestrian walkway, connect walkway for crossing to
other sidewalks
WCCTAC (none)More pedestrian crosswalks across San Pablo Dam Rd, particularly at S.P.
Dam Rd and Amador St.
WCCTAC Hercules Bring actual BART to Hercules not a bus. When BART was originally
conceived, BART was to be in Hercules. We have been paying taxes for
actual BART.
WCCTAC Rodeo Rodeo needs street repairs along Willow Avenue. I would like to be involved
on your community workshop for Hercules/Rodeo area.
WCCTAC Hercules 1) Extend BART to Hercules which is growth with homes and business. It can
be alternate to Richmond, then Hercules if train is limited. 2) Move Hercules
Bus Terminals back to old place opposite Shell gas. Too far to walk, especially
no shade and hard for everyone. 3) Remove the red traffic light control
freeway on-ramp - very dangerous to start and stop
WCCTAC Hercules Extend BART Richmond Line to Pinole/Hercules; build at San Pablo Ave Hwy
4 entrance
WCCTAC Hercules Bart to Hercules
WCCTAC Richmond I am opposed to reducing car lanes to add bike lanes. Richmond did this on
Barrett Ave. It has led to long lines of cars. Meanwhile, the bike lanes rarely
have riders.
4-92
Table C - Record Log - Survey Comments Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes paper surveys received as of October 10, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 40
RTPC Jurisdiction Comment/Suggestion
WCCTAC,
TRANSPAC
Martinez 1) 680 paved before Hwy 80 which was and is in worse condition. Hwy 80
overdue paving. 2) Martinez has horrendous streets. 3) sidewalks needed
Castro Ranch Road to San Pablo Dam Rd. 4) Contra Costa tax payers have
paid for BART since the beginning. Santa Clara initially elected not to. How
come they are getting BART before continuing up Hwy 80! Our
legislatures/Transportation Authority not advocating their taxpayers.
WCCTAC,
TRANSPAC
(none) Send BART along a route that passes Pinole, Hercules, and Martinez. Maybe
place the tracks parallel with Highway 80 and Highway 4. Also better and
more long-term parking options at BART stations.
WCCTAC,
TRANSPAC
Martinez Extend BART to Hercules/Crockett Rodeo and connect to Martinez. Finalize
ferry project and railroad connection - see Rodeo Pier and Rodeo canal for
project
4-93
Table D - Record Log - Letters Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes letters received as of October 28, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 41
Date Agency or
Organization Description Prepared by
9/15/14 City of Concord The Authority should ensure that the CTP incorporate
the State Route 4 Operational Improvements Project
Ray Kuzbari,
Transportation
Manager
9/15/14 East Bay Regional
Park District
Forwarded a list of projects to be included in the
financially unconstrained list of project in the CTP. The list
contained 15 projects estimated to cost $122 million and
an estimate of projected maintenance needs of $2.5
million per year
Jim Townsend,
Manager Trails
Dev. Prog.
9/16/14 TRANSPAC Forwarded comments made at the TRANSPAC from
bicycling advocates that asked for funding for bicycling and
Safe Routes to School improvements and suggested the
use of electric bicycles for a bike share program
Barbara
Neustadter,
TRANSPAC Mgr.
9/26/14 Sierra Club, SF Bay
Chapter
Asks what the Authority could do to reduce vehicle miles
traveled and help achieve State and regional climate
changes goals. Recommends strengthening strategies that
support transit and other alternatives travel modes.
Recommends that the CTP include a financially
constrained plan that achieves climate change goals.
Matt Williams,
Chair
9/29/14 Bike East Bay The CTP should focus more on necessary transit
improvements and bicycle and pedestrian access to
transit. Regional Routes should focus on corridors and the
movement of people rather just roadways and the
movement of vehicles. Jurisdictions should adopt modern
bikeway design standards.
David Campbell,
Advocacy Director
9/29/14 City of Lafayette Recommended the inclusion of Mt. Diablo Blvd. as a
Lamorinda Interjurisdictional Route from Happy Valley
Road to Brown Avenue and revisions to actions in the
Lamorinda Action Plan.
Don Tatzin, Mayor
10/13/14 East Bay Leadership
Council
Supports enhanced, multi-modal connectivity on the I-680
Corridor, supports new technologies for autonomous and
connected vehicles. Recommends including utilities for
enhanced broadband along travel corridors to support
improved communications and economic development.
Kristen Connelly,
President and
CEO
4-94
Table D - Record Log - Letters Received about 2014 Draft CTP
Includes letters received as of October 28, 2014
Public Comments on the 2014 Draft CTP - RTPC Packet - November 2014 42
Date Agency or
Organization Description Prepared by
10/14/14 BART General support for the overall CTP approach and for the
projects in the CTPL. The letter highlights critical needs
for new railcars, the Hayward Maintenance Complex,
Train Control Modernization, public safety, station access
and parking, and operations and maintenance.
Joel Keller,
President
10/15/14 Transportation
Solutions Defense
& Education Fund
Addressing climate change should be the overarching
concern and objective of the CTP but, while it does a
good job of describing the issue, the projects and
strategies of the CTP focus primarily on vehicular mobility
and the maintenance of suburban models of land use.
CCTA needs to make it clear to local jurisdictions that
land use patterns for new development must change with
new jobs and housing located close to transit, with
adequate density.
David Schonbrunn,
President
10/21/14 Contra Costa
Board of
Supervisors
Supports prioritizing funding for local road maintenance,
Complete Streets, storm water, transit service, SR2S, and
major corridor improvements throughout Contra Costa.
Also includes chapter-specific projects and comments on
the CTPL (Volume 3).
Supervisor Karen
Mitchoff, Chair
10/22/14 City of Pinole The CTP should consider increasing "return to source"
funding to jurisdictions for the maintenance of local
streets and roads.
Belinda Espinosa,
City Manager
4-95
Summary of Letters Received on Draft 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan
Date|Date Received* Agency/Organization Description Signed by
1 9/15/2014 City of Concord The Authority should ensure that the CTP incorporate the State Route 4 Operational Improvements Project. This project includes expansion of SR 4 from west of I-680 to Baily Road, including one new mixed-flow lane in each direction.
Ray Kuzbari, Transportation Manager
2 9/15/2014 East Bay Regional Park District Forwarded a list of projects to be included in the financially unconstrained list of project in the CTP. The list contained 15 projects estimated to cost $122 million and an estimate of projected maintenance needs of $2.5 million per year
Jim Townsend, Manager Trails Dev. Program
3 9/16/2014 TRANSPAC Forwarded comments made at the TRANSPAC from bicycling advocates that asked for funding for bicycling and Safe Routes to School improvements and suggested the use of electric bicycles for a bike share program
Barbara Neustadter, TRANSPAC Manager
4 9/26/2014 Sierra Club, SF Bay Chapter Asks what the Authority could do to reduce vehicle miles traveled and help achieve State and regional climate changes goals. Recommends strengthening strategies that support transit and other alternatives travel modes. Recommends that the CTP include a financially constrained plan that achieves climate change goals.
Matt Williams, Chair
5 9/29/2014 Bike East Bay The CTP should focus more on necessary transit improvements and bicycle and pedestrian access to transit. Regional Routes should focus on corridors and the movement of people rather just roadways and the movement of vehicles. Jurisdictions should adopt modern bikeway design standards.
David Campbell, Advocacy Director
4-96
Summary of Letters Received on Draft 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan Page 2
6 9/29/2014 10/02/2014 City of Lafayette Recommended the inclusion of Mt. Diablo Blvd. as a Lamorinda Interjurisdictional Route from Happy Valley Road to Brown Avenue and revisions to actions in the Lamorinda Action Plan.
Don Tatzin, Mayor
7 10/13/2014 10/20/2014 East Bay Leadership Council Supports enhanced, multi-modal connectivity on the I-680 Corridor, supports new technologies for autonomous and connected vehicles. Recommends including utilities for enhanced broadband along travel corridors to support improved communications and economic development.
Kristen Connelly, President and CEO
8 10/14/2014 11/03/2014 BART General support for the overall CTP approach and for the projects in the CTPL. The letter highlights critical needs for new railcars, the Hayward Maintenance Complex, Train Control Modernization, Public safety, station access and parking, and operations and maintenance.
Joel Keller, President
9 10/15/2014 Transportation Solutions Defense & Education Fund
Addressing climate change should be the overarching concern and objective of the CTP but, while it does a good job of describing the issue, the projects and strategies of the CTP focus primarily on vehicular mobility and the maintenance of suburban models of land use. CCTA needs to make it clear to local jurisdictions that land use patterns for new development must change with new jobs and housing located close to transit, with adequate density.
David Schonbrunn, President
10 10/21/2014 10/27/2014 Contra Costa Board of Supervisors Supports prioritizing funding for local road maintenance, Complete Streets, storm water, transit service, SR2S, and major corridor improvements throughout Contra Costa. Also includes chapter-specific projects and comments on the CTPL (Volume 3).
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, Chair
11 10/22/2014 10/23/2014 City of Pinole The CTP should consider increasing "return to source" funding to jurisdictions for the maintenance of local streets and roads.
Belinda Espinosa, City Manager
12 10/28/2014 AC Transit Proposal to add $1.093 billion to existing projects and programs, and $234 million in new projects to Volume 3 – the CTPL.
Jim Cunradi, Transportation Planning Manager
4-97
Summary of Letters Received on Draft 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan Page 3
13 10/09/2014 10/28/2014 TRANSPLAN Support for the e-BART extension to Brentwood, support for Vasco Road safety improvements, SR 239 (TriLink), the James Donlon Boulevard Extension, parallel arterial improvements in the SR 4 Corridor, and Safe Routes to School programs and infrastructure. Also support for a variety of transit, pedestrian, and bicycle improvement programs.
Sal Evola, Chair TRANSPLAN
14 10/29/2014 City of Hercules Requests that a study be conducted to improve pedestrian, bicycle, and trail facilities through the I-80/SR 4 interchange area for improved access to the Hercules Transit Center.
David Biggs, City Manager
15 10/30/201411/03/2014 City of San Pablo Requests that the 2014 CTP include build-out of the City's General Plan as adopted in 2011. Requests adding "Quiet-zone railroad crossing improvements to Giant Road project No. 3907.
Michele Rodriguez, Development Services Manager
16 10/31/2014 County Health Services Encourages the Authority to take a Health in all Policies (HiaP) approach to the 2014 CTP, by incorporating health considerations into the transportation decision-making process. Support for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, transit, paratransit, Safe Routes to School, and related projects that would help reduce vehicle miles travelled.
Dr. Wendel Brunner, Public Health Director
17 10/31/2014
11/03/2014
City of Brentwood Supports further improvements to SR 4, the extension of e-BART to Brentwood, safety and circulation improvements for Vasco Road, and implementation of SR 239 (TriLink).
Casey McCann, Comm Dev. Balwinder Grewal, Dir of Public Works
18 11/03/2014 BIA Requests delineation of the differences between ABAG Projections 2011 and 2013; seeks a full analysis of proposed new CEQA guidelines that would eliminate use of Level of Service; suggests limiting the definition of Routes of Regional Significance to roadways.
LIsa Voderbrueggen, East Bay Exec Director for Gov. Affairs
19 11/03/2014 Monument Crisis Center Requests high-frequency bus service to connect 12 low-income communities in Concord with nearby facilities, services, schools, and work centers.
Sandra Scherer, Exec Director
20 11/3/14 City of Orinda Supportive of local streets and roads maintenance funding. Requests inclusion of several new projects in the CTPL.
Janet Keeter, City Manager
4-98
Summary of Letters Received on Draft 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan Page 4
21 11/03/2014 Caltrans Various comments on the Draft SEIR and the CTP. Recommends that the Authority consider development of a countywide fee program to mitigate impacts on the Regional Transportation Network. Requests greater emphasis on goods movement.
Erik Alm, District Branch Chief
22 11/03/2014 TransForm Supports improved local bus service, especially in lieu of BART parking and Park and Ride Lots. Supportive of Express Bus and new technologies to enhance bus service. Encourages keeping transit fares low. Suggests greater emphasis on BART maintenance rather than road maintenance. Support for Safe Routes to School, pedestrian and bicycle projects, SMART parking systems, and other transit-oriented programs. Conditional support of Express Lanes. Opposition to SR 239 and the James Donlon Extension project.
Joel Ramos, Regional Planning Director
23 11/03/2014 AC Transit Calls for a PDA-supportive strategy with greater integration of focused growth to facilitate use of transit, walking, and biking. Supports development of a high quality, integrated transit system to serve all passengers.
David Armijo, General Manager
24 11/03/2014 City of Brentwood Park & Rec Dept. Recommends a list of bicycle and pedestrian projects located in East County for inclusion in the CTP. Bruce Mulder, Director
25 11/03/2014 City of El Cerrito Various comments on the CTPL. Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/ City Engineer
26 11/03/2014 Greenbelt Alliance This letter comments on both the Draft 2014 CTP and the Draft SEIR. The letter includes five recommendations regarding performance-based project assessment, addressing Greenhouse Gas and Vehicle Miles Travelled, expansion of the Transportation for Livable Communities and One Bay Area Grant program, integration of the Concord Naval Weapons Station proposed development plan into the 2014 CTP, and use of an integrated transit, bicycle, and pedestrian alternative to the Project in the SEIR.
Joel Devalcourt, Regional Representative, East Bay
27 11/03/2014 City of Richmond Support for inclusion of CyberTran, which helps to meet goals 1, 2, 3, and 5 in the 2014 CTP. Bill Lindsay, City Manager
4-99
Summary of Letters Received on Draft 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan Page 5
28 11/03/2014 BART Support inclusion of CyberTran as a technology innovation expenditure in the 2014 CTP. Zakhary Mallet, Director, District 7
29 11/03/2014 Supervisor John Gioia, Contra Costa County
Supports Richmond's CyberTran project for inclusion in the 2014 CTP. John Gioia, Supervisor District One
4-100
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
CSAC (California State Association of Counties)
Bill Proposal Form
Proposal from Contra Costa County:
Proposal to Increase walk & bike rates to/fromK-12 schools
I. SUMMARY
The intent of the bill, or bills, is to increase walk/bike rates to school by way of changes to the
vehicle code to 1) increase the prescriptive size of the school zone, 2) authorize performance
methods for further expanding the zone, and 23) enhance penalties for speeding violations in
those newly defined zones.
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Problem
(1) What problem does the proposal address?
The decline of walk/bike rates to/from K-12 facilities1,2 is well-established. More specifically
however, there is data that shows that a primary reason for this decline is the concern of school
administrators and parents over traffic safety3, driver behavior and/or speeding in particular. The
proposal directly addresses this issue.
There are existing Safe Routes to School (SR2S) programs at the federal, state, and local level
that seek to improve the walk/bike rate primarily through engineering, encouragement,
enforcement and education solutions. The effectiveness of these existing programs, and their
associated investments, will continue to be compromised by these traffic/speeding/safety issues.
In that light, the this proposal will directly improve K-12 walk/bike rates in addition to acting as
a “force multiplier” in that it will leverage existing and future investments allowing them to be
even more effective.
As discussed at the September 2014 CEAC Policy Conference, this proposal does not address the
lack of adequate enforcement which is a limitation in many jurisdictions. The Association may
wish to consider the following, 1) even in the presence of adequate enforcement resources the
school zone size is not reflective of actual school/home travel patterns, that is to say inadequate,
and 2) the presence of a bottleneck or shortcoming in one potential solution area (enforcement in
this case) should not stop the Association from seeking improvements in other areas.
(2) Does the proposal address a problem of statewide significance?
1 In 1969, approximately half of all schoolchildren walked or bicycled to or from school, and 87% of those living
within 1 mile of school walked or bicycled. US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
1969 National Personal Transportation Survey: travel to school. Washington, DC: US Department of
Transportation; 1972. Available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/1969/q.pdf
2 Today, fewer than 15% of children and adolescents use active modes of transportation. US Department of Health
and Human Services. Physical activity and health: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Department of
Health and Human Services, CDC; 1996.
3 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Barriers to Children Walking to or from School United States
2004, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report September 30, 2005. Available:
www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5438a2.htm.
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
Yes, the aforementioned decline of walk/bike rates is both a statewide and national problem as
evidenced by the cited data.
(3) Have counties been involved in any litigation regarding this
problem? If so, cite the case.
No.
(4) What other source materials, case law, or data, document the
existence of the problem?
In addition to the previously cited national data (1,2,3), there is recent locally collected data4 that
validate/mirror the national findings.
B. Interested Parties
(1) What counties, organizations or individuals are interested in the
problem?
In addition to the widely accepted acknowledgment of the problem (see response II. A. 1 above),
the need to solve the problem is generally accepted as well. There exists numerous national,
state, local and NGO based SR2S programs which demonstrate broad interest in solving the
problem.
(2) What counties, organizations or individuals would be sources of
information about the problem?
At this time, the primary sources of information about the problem are the Safe Routes to School
National Partnership, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Centers for Disease Control.
(3) Who would be likely to support/oppose the proposal? Why?
Supporters are likely to include state/local jurisdictions and NGOs that prioritize programs such
as SR2S, active transportation, traffic safety, childhood obesity intervention, complete streets,
etc. Due to recent legislation (AB1358 [2008], AB32/SB 375 [2006/2008]) that either directly or
indirectly encourage a shift to non-motorized travel, support for the proposal should be broad.
Opposition is likely to include the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the
California Highway Patrol who have opposed enhanced fine zones in the past.
(4) Identify groups or other governmental agencies that could be
affected by the proposal, either favorably or adversely?
Law enforcement would have no entirely new laws to enforce. The proposal simply enhances or
modifies either existing laws or the penalties for violations of existing laws.
4 CCTA SR2S Master Plan: Existing Conditions: Data Summary:
1. Table 8: Top 10 Reasons Students do not Walk or Bike to School, by Planning Area: The responses “driving too fast”
or “driver behavior” is on 4 of 5 subregions responses and the ranking ranges from #10 to #2.
2. Table 10: Top 5 Programs or Improvements that Could Encourage Students to Walk or Bicycle to/from School,
Jurisdictions vs. School Administrators: The #1 response from administrators was “If traffic congestion or speeding
around school was relieved”.
3. Table 11: Top 5 Programs or Improvements that Could Encourage Students to Walk or Bicycle to/from School, by
Planning Area: Every subregion had “Relieving traffic congestion/speeding around schools” in the top 3. It was #1 in
three subregions.
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
Public works departments would be responsible for increased signage requirements. Again, this
is not a new burden but an incremental increase of existing obligations.
The proposal also includes authorization to expand the school zone beyond the prescriptive
distance. This expansion would be based on a traffic study which would be the responsibility of
local agencies. However, this expansion would not be compulsory and only take place at the
discretion of local jurisdictions.
As a group, automobile drivers will be affected. The culture shift necessary to accept slower
speeds in corridors used to travel to/from schools should not be underestimated.
III. PROPOSAL
A. Existing Law
(1) What are the statutory provisions currently applicable to the
proposal?
Current statutory provisions are as follows:
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 22352: States that the maximum speed limit is 25 mph
“when approaching or passing a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway
and posted with a standard ‘SCHOOL’ warning sign, while children are going to or leaving the
school either during school hours or during the noon recess period.”
CVC Section 22358.4: Based on traffic survey results, the maximum speed limit can be reduced
to 15 mph up to 500 feet away from a school and to 25 mph from 500 to 1,000 feet away from a
school.
AB 1886 (2002): The bill authorized a pilot program in Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Alameda
Counties, which “would double or increase the fines as described above for a designated
violation occurring in a specially posted school zone, as specified.” Fines collected from this
violation were used to fund bicycle and pedestrian safety programs. This statute was allowed to
sunset in 2007.
The post-mortem report to the legislature on the program (by CHP) did not endorse the program,
“…the findings do not support continuation of the program…” Observations on the pilot
program and the post-mortem report:
1. The estimated cost to implement the program described in the post-mortem report
characterizes sign installation as “very costly”. In response:
Some of the Options/Alternatives proposed in the report are more expensive than the
signage (traffic calming for example),
The Options/Alternatives in the report include signage, despite being flagged as “very
costly” earlier in the report.
Signage is regularly considered a low cost solution.
2. Questioning the effectiveness of increased fines and additional signage is to question,
essentially, the effectiveness of a major component of traffic control worldwide. The
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
proposal is a minor incremental extension of a pervasive system that is reasonably and
broadly assumed to have some measure of effectiveness.
3. The threshold for the determination of “costly” may be unrealistic in the report.
4. Limited (observed) benefits from the pilot may be due to minimal implementation efforts.
(2) What case law is relevant to this issue?
No existing case law is relevant to this issue.
(3) Why is existing law inadequate to deal with the problem?
Existing law regarding school zones authorizes signage and zones at 500’ and 1,000 feet. Neither
distance is reflective of actual pedestrian/bicycle access patterns at school and inconsistent with
SR2S funding/projects/concepts and the State’s Health in All Policies Initiative.
AB 1886, which implemented double fine school zones, was allowed to sunset in 2007, which
meant the end of an extra disincentive for drivers to speed within school zones.
B. Suggested Legislation
(1) Describe the specific bill proposal.
Proposed changes to the code are below. Where necessary, annotations [#] accompany the
changes.
Proposed Language – Penalty Enhancement: The language below is adapted from the Vehicle
Code sections for moving violations incurred by commercial drivers. Commercial drivers are
professional drivers and held to a higher standard than those drivers holding conventional
licenses. Due to the physiological limitations of, and generally more sensitive nature of the
population accessing schools, this “higher standard” is proposed for all drivers operating in the
school zone.
The penalty enhancement was originally an increased fine. However, in Governor Brown’s
9/19/14 veto message on SB 1151 (Cannella Vehicles: School Zone Fines) he indicated
opposition to the use of fines as a penalty which is consistent with other vetoes5 that included
additional/increased fines. In the veto message he went on to express support for school zone
safety.
VEHICLE CODE - VEH
DIVISION 6. DRIVERS' LICENSES [12500 - 15325] ( Heading of Division 6
amended by Stats. 1961, Ch. 1615.)
CHAPTER 1. Issuance of Licenses, Expiration,and Renewal [12500 - 13008] (
Chapter 1 enacted by Stats. 1959, Ch. 3.)
ARTICLE 3. Issuance and Renewal of Licenses [12800 - 12819] ( Article 3
enacted by Stats. 1959, Ch.3.)
5 AB 1532 (Gatto), AB 2337 (Linder), AB 2398 (Levine)
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
12810.5. (#) For purposes of this subdivision, each point assigned
pursuant to Section 12810 shall be valued at one and one-half times the
value otherwise required by that section for each violation that occurs
on a highway with a school warning sign as established in Section
22358.4. If a person is convicted of a second offense within seven years,
on a highway with a school warning sign, each point assigned shall be
valued at twice the value otherwise required by that section.
Proposed Language – Safety Zone Expansion: The current dimensions authorized in statute do
not reflect actual access distances used by students. The following changes are meant to increase
the effectiveness of the zone.
VEHICLE CODE - VEH
DIVISION 11. RULES OF THE ROAD [21000 - 23336]
CHAPTER 7. Speed Laws [22348 - 22413]
ARTICLE 1. Generally [22348 - 22366]
22358.4.
…
(b) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) or any other provision of law, a local authority may, by
ordinance or resolution, determine and declare prima facie speed limits as follows:
(A) A 15 miles per hour prima facie limit in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed
limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, when approaching, at a distance of less than 500 1,320 [1] feet
from, or passing, a school building or the grounds of a school building, contiguous to a highway
and posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 15 miles per hour, while
children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess
period.[2] The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching, at a distance of less than 500
1,320[1] feet from, or passing, school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence,
gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children[2] and the highway is posted
with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 15 miles per hour.
(B) A 25 miles per hour prima facie limit in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed
limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, when approaching, at a distance of 500 to 1,000 1,320 [1] feet
from, a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a school
warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 25 miles per hour, while children are going to or leaving
the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall
also apply when approaching, at a distance of 500 to 1,000 1,320 [1] feet from, school grounds that
are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds
are in use by children and the highway is posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed
limit of 25 miles per hour.
22358.4. (#) Notwithstanding the maximum distance established in this section (22358.4), a local
authority may, upon the basis of a travel survey documenting school attendance boundaries and/or
travel patterns to and from a school, extend the maximum distance to establish a prima facie speed
limit and school warning signs, as defined in section 22358.4, to a distance and/or specific
locations consistent with the findings of the travel survey.
VEHICLE CODE - VEH
DIVISION 11. RULES OF THE ROAD [21000 - 23336] ( Division 11 enacted by
Stats. 1959, Ch. 3. )
CHAPTER 7. Speed Laws [22348 - 22413] ( Chapter 7 enacted by Stats.
1959, Ch. 3. )
ARTICLE 1. Generally [22348 - 22366] ( Heading of Article 1 amended by
Stats. 1959, Ch. 11. )
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
22352. The prima facie limits are as follows and shall be applicable
unless changed as authorized in this code and, if so changed, only when
signs have been erected giving notice thereof:
(b) Twenty-five miles per hour:
(2) When approaching or passing a school building or the grounds thereof,
contiguous to a highway and posted with a standard "SCHOOL" warning sign,
while children are going to or leaving the school either during school
hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall also
apply when approaching or passing any school grounds which are not
separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier
while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with a
standard "SCHOOL" warning sign. For purposes of this subparagraph,
standard "SCHOOL" warning signs may be placed at any distance up to 500
1,320 feet away from school grounds.
(OLD Fine Proposal struck below, JC)
Annotations:
[1] The quarter mile distance in the proposal is an accepted (conservative) rule of thumb in
planning6 describing the typical distance people will walk to services. The distance of any school
attendance boundary is far greater than this distance of course.
[2] The basis for the elimination of this language is found in the Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices. The direction to drivers, “…while grounds are in use by children…” is not
entirely consistent with the guidance in the MUTCD,
“Section 1A.02 Principles of Traffic Control Devices
Guidance:
02 To be effective, a traffic control device should meet five basic requirements:
…
C: Convey a clear, simple meaning;
While the direction on the signage is clear, a drivers ability to identify or interpret the state of
“while grounds are in use by children” on the road is not consistently clear and simple. Schools
are used for a variety of uses at different time than instructional hours, sporting events, civic
events, meetings, etc. The eliminated language is similar to the “children at play” sign which is
discouraged in the MUTCD.
In addition, the California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CTCDC) has discussed the issues
with this particular sign/statute in the past. While they have not taken official action, the
following observations were made by the CTCDC and by those testifying before the Committee:
“When Children are Present” unduly grants discretion to motorists to decide when to
adhere to a reduced speed limit.
Direction provided by the sign is “ambiguous” and (paraphrased) drivers and judges are
drawing different interpretations.
“I don’t know that we have the ability to remove the option” (This would be solved by
the proposed statute.)
6 “The Half‐Mile Circle: Does It Best Represent Transit Station Catchments?” Erick Guerra, Robert Cervero, Daniel
Tischler, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley.
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
(2) Do similar provisions exist in other California laws?
As detailed in the existing law section above (III.A.(1)), there are provisions in the CVC that
define school zones and the speed limits within them.
CVC Section 42010/Streets and Highways Code Section 97: The State currently assesses
double fines to discourage speeding and unsafe driving behavior in two particular zones:
highway construction zones and sections of highways that have been deemed, through traffic
studies, to have greater than average rates of vehicular collisions.
(3) Describe a hypothetical application of the proposal.
As suggested above, the proposal modifies existing activities. The following would occur; local
jurisdictions would, at their discretion:
Install additional “school zone” signage based on the increase in prescriptive distance
(1000’ to 1320’ [quarter mile]).
Perform a traffic study to establish the need to further expand the zone. The traffic study
would include examination of the attendance boundaries, direct observation of travel
patterns, etc.
Enhanced fines would be assessed through existing mechanisms (VC 42010) as defined
in section B. 1. above.
C. Fiscal Impact
(1) Would there be any potential fiscal impact on counties under the
proposal? If so, describe.
By design, this proposal is a minor increment built upon existing obligations and activities. That
said, fiscal impacts are estimated to be as follows:
Positive: Depending on how fines are handled, agencies could see an increase in revenues. (Need
to define how revenues are handled.)N/A
Neutral: Law enforcement would have no additional patrol obligations under the proposal.
Negative: Public Works Departments will have an obligation to increase the number of signs in
school areas.
Additional activities are authorized under this proposal (a travel study to supporting further
expansion of the school zone) but they are not compulsory under the proposal and only
undertaken at the discretion of the agency.
(2) Would there be any potential fiscal impact on other persons or
organizations, public or private?
Violators would face increased fines.
D. History
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
(1) Has this proposal ever been introduced in the Legislature? If so,
what was the bill number and why did it fail?
SB 1151 (Cannella): Vehicles: School Zone Fines: The bill would have required that an
additional fine be imposed for specified violations if the violation occurred when passing a
school building or school grounds. The bill would have further required that the fine moneys to
be deposited in a fund for school safety zone projects under the Active Transportation Program.
The legislation was vetoed based on the Governor's opposition to fines.SB 1151 (Cannella):
Vehicles: School Zone Fines: The bill would require that an additional fine be imposed for
specified violations if the violation occurred when passing a school building or school grounds.
Would further require the fine moneys to be deposited in a fund for school safety zone projects
under the Active Transportation Program. The legislation is pending.
(2) Is judicial or executive branch resolution of the problem
possible? Explain.
No. The activities proposed to be impacted by a bill are currently affected by the aforementioned
code sections. The resolution of the problem is most easily/efficiently affected by modifications
to those existing sections.
E. Public Policy
(1) What are the public policy reasons in support of this proposal?
Against?
The proposal is an extension and targeted refinement of a policy shift that has been building for
some time now. The following activities precede the proposed bill:
2001: Caltrans Deputy Directive 64 Regarding integrating bicycling and walking facilities when
making road improvements.
2006: AB32 the California Global Warming Solutions Act passes, see implications of the related
SB 375 below.
2008: AB1358 The Complete Streets Act was passed to ensure that all public roads in California
are designed and operated to accommodate all roadway users, including bicyclists, public transit
riders, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities.
2008: Caltrans Deputy Directive 64 Revision 1 is signed to communicate the intent of the
Department to integrate Complete Streets as a matter of policy.
2009: SB375 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act implements AB32 more
specifically in the transportation and land use realm. Success of the sustainable communities
strategy assumes a mode shift from autos to cycling, walking and transit.
2012: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) was passed by Congress
making SR2S activities to be eligible to compete for funding alongside other programs, including
the Transportation Enhancements program and Recreational Trails program, as part of a the
Transportation Alternatives Program.
2013: SB99/AB101 created the Active Transportation Plan with the goal of making California a
national leader in active transportation.
2013: AB-1371 Vehicles: bicycles: passing distance: The “Three Feet For Safety Act” went in to
effect in 2014
G:\Transportation\Legislation\2015\CSAC Leg Proposals\WordDocs\School Safety Bill Proposal‐CC County‐V2 (11‐7‐14).docx
2014: (Indirect Support) Both Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration endorse the
National Association of City Transportation Officials’ publications, “Urban Street Design
Guide” and “Urban Bikeway Design Guide”. These publications are, among other things, best
practices for accommodating non-motorized users on roadways. While both agencies embraced
non-motorized travel through other actions (complete streets, routine accommodation, etc.) this
endorsement is a significant departure from past practice which typically only supports the use of
internal or industry standard guidance (AASHTO Green Book, Caltrans Highway Design
Manual, MUTCD, etc).
(2) Would any related public policy be affected by this proposal? If
so, describe.
This proposed legislation is not it in conflict with any public policy.
California School Siting and Safety Initiative – Contra Costa County (rev: 11/5/14)
Schools have a large and enduring effect on the character and safety of the surrounding community due to the intensity of
activity at the site and the vulnerability of the student population. Currently, the process by which schools are located and
designed can result in negative community development, environmental, and public health/safety outcomes. Directly related
to this issue is the well-known, often cited decline in K-12 walk/bike to school rates. This decline should not be
accepted as inevitable, but rather as a problem to be reversed through a strategic public policy response. The State
acknowledged school siting issues in recent studies1. The Governor intends on addressing school funding in 20152. Interested
organizations will need to engage in the 2015 legislative and policy development process to ensure adequate reforms are
included in the funding package. This paper provides an issues overview, identifies existing processes, and potential reforms.
The current process of selecting and developing new school sites in California has substantial flaws. This flawed
process can result in poorly functioning school sites, some of which have been acknowledged by the state in recent
reports1. Examples of poor school site function are:
Inadequate or ill-conceived transportation infrastructure3 which causes avoidable congestion and/or chaotic circulation
patterns both of which ultimately result in unsafe conditions.
School locations that have limited or no access to critical municipal services (e.g., fire, sewer, water) and/or are too distant
from the population served to support walking and biking4.
School locations that undermine local/state policies such as sites that are outside urban limit line/urban growth boundary,
in agricultural areas, preclude access by walking and cycling, undermine AB32/SB375 goals, etc.
The safety and access issues mentioned above drain very limited Safe Routes to School (SR2S) funds, and
Certain sites are contentious and strain relations between City Councils, Boards of Supervisors, and School Boards.
The current process has local school districts largely responsible for school siting and design. School districts do not
have adequate policies, authority, or expertise to ensure that school sites have positive outcomes related to safe
access and community development goals. It is the cities/counties, and the State that have this expertise:
By statute, cities and counties have land use planning authority. Cities and counties cannot influence the selection and
development of school sites as state law allows school districts to exempt themselves from this local authority6.
Although the state has substantial statutes and polices5 in place that should inform school siting and design, school districts
are not currently compelled to comply with those policies in their school siting and design decisions.
Local school districts develop and design school sites independent6 of the aforementioned state and local land
development policies. This disconnect is acknowledged by the state in their recent studies1.
This disconnect can be addressed through regulations tied to anticipated revisions to the school construction funding
process anticipated in the 2015‐16 Budget. Implementing a solution using the budget as a mechanism was suggested
by the State during their December 2012 Policy Symposium7 and contemplated in the Governor’s 2013‐14 Budget
Proposal2. The following are concepts to be considered in addressing school siting and design requirements attached
to the proposed 2015 policy changes or with legislation developed in parallel:
Limit the ability of school districts to preempt local zoning ordinances6. This could bring schools under the influence of
SB375;ultimately it is the cities and counties that implement the sustainable communities strategy. (next page)
1 2012 ‐ California’s K‐12 Educational Infrastructure Investments: Leveraging the State’s Role for Quality School Facilities in Sustainable
Communities, Report to the CA Dept of Education by UC Berkeley Center for Cities & Schools, and 2011 ‐ Schools of the Future Report, Tom
Torlakson/State Superintendent of Public Instruction
2 Cabinet Report, 10/20/14 “Brown’s Plan for Fixing School Construction Funding” and in 2014: Governor’s 13‐14 Budget Report, “…now is an
appropriate time to engage in a dialogue on the future of school facilities…”/“School districts and their respective localities should have appropriate
control of the school facilities construction process and priorities.”
3 Bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure is inadequate or not present, school sites in a cul‐de‐sac or with single points of access, safe roadway crossings
are not considered, and no necessary improvements being funded or constructed by the schools.
4 “…studies show that the distance between home and school is the strongest predictor of whether students walk/bike to school.” Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 2012 “School Site Selection and Off‐site Access”
5 AB32/SB375, The Complete Streets Act, Safe Routes to School concepts, and the Health in All Policies Initiative
6 Gov Code §53091(a)‐53097.5: Allows school district preemption from zoning ordinances. Schools consistent with an SCS/PDA could be exempted.
7 Partnering with K‐12 in Building Healthy, Sustainable, and Competitive Regions: Policy Symposium: Proceedings Summary & Next Steps: “These
efforts will inform the legislative debates over the possibility—and priorities—of a future statewide K‐12 school construction bond.”
Contact: John Cunningham, Principal Planner | Contra Costa County
Department of Conservation and Development|john.cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us
g:\transportation\legislation\2015\whitepaper\2014sasiv7.docx
Whether new school siting policies are advisory or prescriptive is critical. Considering that there are existing advisory
documents that should result in high quality school sites it suggests that new policies will need to be compulsory in order to be
effective. Revised language could be implemented with revisions to the California Code of Regulations, Title 5.
Coordination of attendance boundaries between school districts, cities/counties should be compulsory.
Statutes for Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCOs) provide a role for LAFCOs in school site development8
and could be expanded. At a minimum, 1) school districts should be required to consult with LAFCO when a new school
site is being proposed, and 2) LAFCO should discourage the extension of municipal services to school sites located in
agricultural and open space areas pursuant to LAFCO law. More prescriptive restrictions related to the extension of
municipal services should be considered in areas with an adopted Urban Limit Line or Urban Growth Boundary.
Legislation should require revised School Site Selection and Approval Guide and Guide to School Site Analysis and Development.
Critical revisions should be moved from guidance to statutes. [revisions are too voluminous to list in this paper]
School districts, when approving a new site must 1) make findings, w/evidence, that the decision is consistent with
relevant requirements in statute, 2) provide a full-cost accounting (construction, land, off-site infrastructure
[utility/transportation] of facility development, costs borne by other agencies, community, etc.), of site options, and 3) the
approval must include a comprehensive (auto & active modes) circulation plan signed and stamped by a traffic engineer.
The State acknowledges a greater share of funds should be directed to modernization programs than to new construction7.
Any 2014 school construction and modernization bond should be linked to a comprehensive, systematic effort to
reverse the well-known decline in K-12 walking/bike rates which would include the following:
Redefinition of School Zone in state law: Currently, in the vehicle code, school zone signage is limited to 500’ and
1000’. These limits are not reflective of actual pedestrian/bicycle school access patterns and inconsistent with the State’s
own Health in All Policies Initiative and general SR2S concepts. The prescriptive figures should be increased (1320’
minimum) and local agencies should have discretion to further expand the zone based on knowledge of attendance
boundaries, and travel sheds, as established in a traffic study.
Pass and fund implementation of an Enhanced Penalty Double Fine School Zone statute: In 2002 AB 1886 was
passed which implemented a double fine school zone as a pilot9. The statute was allowed to sunset in 2007.
Implement a Vulnerable Road User (VRU) Protection Law: VRU protection laws establish the concept “whoever
can do the most damage has an obligation to be the most careful”. Oregon has such a statute and the League of American
Bicyclists has drafted model legislation10.
Implement and fund the bicycle and pedestrian safety curriculum developed by the State Health in All Policies
Task Force and Strategic Growth Council: The program would have dual benefit of decreased injuries/deaths and
increased walking/biking. California already has numerous communities implementing such a program.
SR2S11 Funding Eligibility: SR2S projects at existing schools should be an eligible use of bond funds.
The State/Caltrans to conduct a study on auto speed: To better understand the decline in K-12 walk/bike rates, this
study would 1) document the change in automobile speeds over time due to improvements in vehicle technology, 2)
document how that change in speed has impacted other road users, and 3) identify any necessary mitigations.
The concepts in this paper are for discussion purposes; they do not necessarily reflect adopted policy positions.
8 LAFCO mandate: 1) encourage orderly formation of local governmental agencies, 2) preserve agricultural land, 3) discourage urban sprawl.
9 The AB 1886 post‐mortem report was inconsistent in its findings and recommendations. The report did not endorse it and gave a negative review
of the program. The lack of success was likely related to the fact that little to no resources were devoted to implementation.
10 801.608 “Vulnerable user of a public way”: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/lawsstatutes/2011ors801.html
http://www.bikeleague.org/sites/bikeleague.org/files/bikeleague/bikeleague.org/action/images/vru_story.pdf
11 Safe Routes to School (SR2S) is typically a program that has a goal of making it safe and convenient children (K‐12) to bicycle and walk to school.
Strategies typically fall in to the “Five E’s”; evaluation, education, encouragement, engineering and enforcement and can include capital projects
(sidewalks/paths), bicycle safety/rules of the road training, increased police presence, crossing guards, etc.
The Board of Supervisors
County Admini stration Bui lding
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, Califo rnia 94553
John Gioia, I" District
Candace Andersen, 2"d Di strict
Mary N. Piepho , 3'd District
Karen Mitchoff. 4°' Di strict
Federal D. Glover, 5th Dis trict
December 11, 2012
The Honorable Tom Torlakson
State Superintendent of Public Instruction
California Department of Education
1430 N Street
Sacramento, C~l y 'j l
Dear Superintend4.f J ()rlaksonf
Contra
Costa
County
David Twa
Cl er k of the Board
and
County Admin istrator
(925) 335-19DO
/v
The Contra Cos~a County Board of Supervisors is writing on a topic of substantial concern: the
reform of State school siting policies. We understand you are aware of the issue and appreciate the
attention you have given it at the state level. The County and neighboring cities must attend to the
land use and transportation implications of poor school siting and design (made with the State's
tacit approval).
In our May 8, 2012letter congratulating you on the release of the Schools of the Future Report, we
were optimistic that school siting reform would be addressed in a positiv e and inclusive manner.
In that letter we also indicated our interest in participating in any implementation discussions.
Our optimism increased with the subsequent release of the "California 's K-12 Educational
b~frastructure In vestm ents : Le veraging the State's Role fo r Quality School Facilities in Sustainable
Commun ities" report. At this time we request that implementation of the findings of the
aforementioned studies include extensive outreach to local jurisdictions.
We unde rstand that that the Senate Education Subcommittee on Sustainable School Facilities
instructed the Director of Facilities to develop an implementation plan for the CA K-12 Educational
Infrast ructu re report. We understand that sev eral internal meetings have taken place to discuss the
implementation proce ss. During the "Policy Symposium" held on the 6th of this month, California
Department of Education (CDE) staff indicated that stakeholder outreach has already been
conducted. We are unaware of any consultation with local agencies or our associated
organizations.
As you are aware, the development of school facilities is a fundamentally local activity. As we
mentioned in our May 8, 2012 letter on this topic, " ... schools potentially act as the anchor of great
The Honorable Tom Torlakson
December 11, 2012
Page 2 of 3
communities ... " Local land use jurisdictions, not the State or school districts, should guide the
development of communities and:
• are the primary forum to which our constituents bring land use, traffic and safety concerns,
• maintain and implement plans for orderly land development, and
• implement underfunded safe routes to school programs, to address safety and school
access issues.
Considering the above, we would be concerned that, if the CDE did not engage local jurisdictions
in this study implementation process, the outcomes are more likely to be flawed.
We hesitate to wade into the details of the issue in this brief letter. However, we are unsure if input
opportunities will be provided given the absence of information on the study implementation
process. Absent a public outreach effort that might have allowed us to tailor our comments or
provide an opportunity to participate in a dynamic discussion on these matters, the Board of
Supervisors respectfully makes the following comments:
1. Recognizing the history of problematic school siting, eligible expenditures for future State
bond funds should include projects to repair existing school access and safety deficiencies.
Eligible expenditures should include on and off-site improvements and automotive and
non-motorized (safe routes to school) facilities.
2. The ability to preempt local land use authority in the siting and design of educational
facilities should be modified to establish a partnership with local government.
3. The State should update its existing facility development guidance1 as a part of the current
study implementation process. Please consider the following comments:
• Work with the Cities-Counties Schools Partnership, California State Association of
Counties, the League of Cities, local jurisdictions, the California County Planning
Directors Association, and the County Engineers Association of California to
develop an approach to integrating educational facilities into local land use plans
and processes while respecting the State's need to deliver school facilities in a
predictable manner.
• Best planning practices now incorporate land use context considerations into policy
guidance. School site acreage minimums are inconsistent with this and should be
modified.
• Compel local school districts and local jurisdictions to work together, either by
statute or financial incentives. The State's administrative responsibilities under the
landmark climate change bills, AB32 and SB375 or the Complete Streets Act of 2008
could be ideal vehicles for this approach. We understand that CDE is contemplating
this and we applaud this potentially efficient strategy.
• Require that the design of vehicular and pedestrian facilities (on and off-site) be
developed jointly with cities' and counties' planners and engineers, who are most
familiar with the community and likely travel patterns.
1 School Site Selection and Approval Guide , and Guide to School Site Analysis and Development
(/)
OCTOBER 20, 2014
Brown’s plan for fixing school construction
funding
by Kimberly Beltran
(Calif.) Education officials watched with frustration this summer as the legislative session ended not only without
agreement on putting a school construction bond before voters but also no new plan to replenish empty bank
accounts used to pay for new schools and maintain old ones.
But out of those uncertainties, Capitol sources say Gov. Jerry Brown is developing a sweeping new proposal for
righting school construction woes.
The plan, which would be released as part of the budget in January, would scale back the traditional reliance on
borrowing and institute some form of a “pay-as-you-go” system supported by an annual contribution from the
Legislature.
Although the proposal remains very much in draft form, critics point out a basic flaw – school facility needs already far
outweigh available resources. Without a dedicated funding source, such as a new tax or bond, school construction –
except in the wealthiest districts – is likely to come to a halt just as economic growth is picking up in some areas.
“We’re hearing that what may be part of the governor’s budget package is some type of a year-to-year line item for
school construction,” said Joe Dixon, assistant superintendent of facilities and governmental relations at Santa Ana
Unified School District and a member of the non-profit Coalition for Adequate School Housing or CASH. “But that
doesn’t really help to meet the need in California to provide facilities – you simply can't plan properly due to the
capricious nature of state funding.”
Brown’s proposed policy shift comes as the state’s last remaining bond authority for school construction is being
doled out to districts with previously approved projects. The Office of Public School Construction is, however, still
taking applications and local educational agencies continue to line up for what they hope someday will be the next
wave of state funding.
But the governor has made clear his desire to scale back both the state’s role in funding school facilities and the layers
of bureaucracy that complicate the process of building or repairing them. In his last two annual budget proposals he
called the current system “overly complex,” “cumbersome” and “costly” to districts, outlining some of the issues that
need to be addressed.
This summer, he nixed a popular Legislative proposal to put a school facilities bond on the Nov. 4 ballot, partly
because a state water bond to deal with the drought took priority and partly because of his unwillingness to take on
new debt.
Although it’s unclear as to what other financing mechanism the administration might propose using in January,
stakeholders say the governor will likely stick to his oft cited ‘principle of subsidiarity” – local control – in crafting his
new school facilities plan, perhaps awarding districts a lump-sum grant amount for construction costs and giving
districts more decision-making power, thereby cutting some of the bureaucratic red tape that slows the project
approval process.
The proposal could include a structure for pay outs to districts based on project priority, i.e. safety upgrades or
overcrowding relief, or financial need – those districts unable to raise construction money locally, for instance, would
receive state support first.
One school facilities expert said the new plan could be a combination of a ‘pay-as-you-go’ model with options for
smaller bond packages tied to shorter-term financing.
“There’s a wide variety of concepts floating out there,” said Eric Bakke, a facilities representative for the Los Angeles
Unified School District. “One theory is that maybe the focus of the state should be on those districts that need help;
the ones that can’t go out for large bonds of their own.”
Without matching funds from the state, however, even districts able to pass local bond measures and assess fees on
housing developers won’t be able to stretch their school construction dollars nearly as far. There are few funding
options available, according to most facilities experts, offering the bang for the buck that voter-approved bonds do.
The state now pays $2.4 billion a year in debt service on the $35.5 billion in school construction bonds issued since
1998, the year the current School Facilities Program, or SFP was established.
The last major state bond issue with significant funds targeting school construction was approved by voters in 2006.
Under the program, school districts raise their own construction cash – through the passage of local bonds, collection
of fees and taxes or some combination of the three – and then may apply to receive matching funds from the state.
With the majority of available funding in the SFP nearly exhausted, program staff has spent the better part of a year
painstakingly reviewing policies and procedures with an eye toward streamlining, as well as identifying alternative
revenue sources, but with little success.
Having already convinced voters in 2012 to approve a temporary tax hike for schools’ day-to-day operational costs,
Brown is unlikely to go that route to fund any state programs again anytime soon. It has been suggested by some
legislators that the Proposition 30 tax hike should be extended beyond 2017 – perhaps even to fund school
construction projects – but the governor has been adamant that the state not burden taxpayers further.
Whatever program the governor proposes, it will no doubt be shaped through the legislative policy committee
process, with heavy stakeholder input – a two-year timeframe at best.
In the meantime, said Dixon, CASH is moving forward with its own long-term strategies for making sure the state
meets what it and many others believe is a Constitutional obligation to provide its six million K-12 students with safe,
adequate learning facilities.
“We have a good, solid School Facilities Program and we need to make sure that we’re able to use it to mitigate the
needs of schools going forward,” he said, noting that a construction bond in 2016 is one of the group’s goals.
Legal action to try to force the state to fulfill its funding obligation is not out of the question, according to Dixon, but as
a last resort only. It all depends upon the state’s next move.
“The biggest unanswered question is: What is the real funding source that’s going to be viable that will make this
work?” said one Capitol insider who asked to not be named. “Because if you try and fund facilities out of the General
Fund, there’s nothing there.”
November 2014 local Elections for Transportation Purposes
According to CAL TAX, for this cycle (June and November) 53 jurisdictions sought
approval of sales tax increases, 40 asked voters to approve parcel taxes, and
school districts placed 113 school bond measures on the ballot.
Five of the following six measures represent sales tax proposals for transportation
purposes and one is a bond, all on Tuesday's ballot. Five of these measures were
successful while one (Turlock) exceeded 60% approval, but did not pass.
San Francisco
Local Measure A -San Francisco Transportation and Road Improvement Bond
Ballots cast Percentage
Yes 110,153 71.23%
No
Total
44,488
154,641
28.77%
100%
This measure requires 66%% affirmative votes to pass
Alameda County
Measure 88 -Alameda County
Needs 2/3 majority Yes votes to pass
#of Contest %of Total Votes
Yes 147910 69.56
No 64725 30.44
Monterey-Salinas Transit District
Measure Q-MSTD
1/8% Sales Tax; requires 2/3 vote
Vote Count Percent
YES 30,812 72.45%
NO 11,715 27.55%
Total 42,527 100.00
City/ Monterey
Measure P
1% for 4 years for road repair
Count Percent
YES 3,237 74.48%
NO 1,109 25.52%
Total 4,346 100.00%
City/ Atascadero
Measure F-14
Yz% for 12 years for road repair; majority required (50% +1)
YES 59.03%
NO 40.97%
City /Turlock
Measure B
Yz% for 7 years for road repair; requires 2/3 vote
Yes ........... .
No ........... .
61.02%
38.98%
TRANSPORTATION, WATER &
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 8.
Meeting Date:12/04/2014
Subject:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to submit MTC grant applications
for the TDA 2015/2016 funding cycle.
Submitted For: Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Department:Public Works
Referral No.: 2
Referral Name: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to submit, on behalf of the County,
grant applications for the Transportation Development Act (TDA) 2015/2016
funding cycle.
Presenter: Angela Villar, Department of Public
Works
Contact: Angela Villar
(925)313-2016
Referral History:
TDA Public Utilities Code Sections 99233.3 and 99234 make funds available in the nine-county
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Region for pedestrian/bicycle purposes. MTC
makes annual allocations of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds to eligible
claimants after review of applications submitted by cities, counties or congestion management
agencies.
The County is eligible to submit three projects, one each from West, Central, and East Contra
Costa County.
Consideration is given to projects that can demonstrate one or more of the following objectives:
1. Elimination or improvement of an identified problem area (specific safety hazards such as
high-traffic narrow roadways or barriers to travel) on routes that would otherwise provide
relatively safe and direct bicycle or pedestrian travel.
2. Roadway improvements or construction of a continuous interconnected route to provide
reasonably direct access to activity centers (employment, educational, cultural, recreational)
where access did not previously exist or was hazardous.
3. Secure bicycle parking facilities, especially in high-use activity areas, at transit terminals, and
at park-and-ride lots.
4. Other provisions that facilitate bicycle/transit or walk/transit trips. For example, bike racks on
buses.
5. Maintenance of multiple purpose pathways that are closed to motorized traffic or for the
purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes.
6. Funds may be used for construction and plans, specification, and estimates (PS&E) phases of
work. Project level environmental, planning, and right of way phases are not eligible uses of funds.
7. Projects that enhance or encourage bicycle or pedestrian commutes.
8. Intersection safety improvements including bulbouts/curb extensions, transit stop extensions,
installation of pedestrian countdown or accessible pedestrian signals, or pedestrian signal timing
adjustments. Striping high-visibility crosswalks or advanced stop-back lines, where warranted.
9. Purchase and installation of pedestrian traffic control devices, such as High-intensity Activated
crosswalk (HAWK) beacons, Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB), or pedestrian safety
“refuge” islands, where warranted.
10. Projects that provide connection to and continuity with longer routes provided by other means
or by other jurisdictions to improve regional continuity.
11. The Project may be part of a larger roadway improvement project as long as the funds are
used only for the bicycle and/or pedestrian component of the larger project.
12. Bicycle Safety Education Programs.
13. Comprehensive Bicycles and Pedestrian Facilities Plan.
Referral Update:
The call for projects for the 2015/2016 TDA Article 3 funds was released on October 22, 2014
and is intended to fund pedestrian and bicycle improvements throughout the region. MTC has not
yet released the estimated bid target for Contra Costa County (County).
Recommendations from County staff considered projects throughout Contra Costa as potential
applications for TDA funding. Efforts focused on projects currently identified in the Countywide
Bicycle & Pedestrian Plan and Sidewalk Priority List. The following projects are recommended
by staff as candidates for TDA applications based upon competitive merits, project readiness, and
the need for additional funding.
1. A. Pomona Street Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project, Crockett (West County):
The purpose of this project is to improve pedestrian safety along Pomona Street in Crockett by
improving several existing uncontrolled crosswalks in the vicinity of John Swett High School,
Carquinez Middle School, and the Crockett Community Center. Pomona Street is one of the
busiest streets in Crockett, connecting the downtown area to Interstate 80. Several recent
collisions involving pedestrians have occurred along Pomona Street and the community has
requested improvements along the roadway. The project proposes to add bulb-outs/curb
extensions, along with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) curb ramps, and Rectangular
Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFBs) at the existing crossings at the Pomona Street/3rd Avenue and
Pomona Street/Rolph Avenue intersections. It will also install ADA curb ramps and RRFBs at
two mid-block crossings – one on Rolph Avenue north of Pomona Street and one on Pomona
Street east of Rolph Avenue. The project will help increase visibility of, and safety to students
near schools, as well as increase driver awareness of pedestrians in the area.
OR
B. 4th Street Sidewalk Improvements, Rodeo (West County):
The purpose of this project is to construct pedestrian facilities along 4th Street in Rodeo from
Parker Avenue to Vaqueros Avenue. Existing gaps in sidewalk along both sides of the roadway
provide an uneven surface that is difficult for pedestrians to navigate. The project will provide
continuous sidewalk along 4th Street to connect residents from the east side of Rodeo Creek to the
commercial areas along Parker Avenue. It will also improve the Rodeo Creek Trail pedestrian and
bicycle trail crossing at 4th Street. In addition, the project will construct curb ramps, driveways,
and sidewalk to meet ADA standards.
2. Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements, Central Contra Costa County (Central County):
The purpose of this project is to construct pedestrian crosswalk enhancements to improve
pedestrian safety and increase driver awareness at existing crosswalks located at four schools in
Central Contra Costa County. Crosswalks were chosen due to their close proximity to schools and
site locations where the existing crossings are uncontrolled. Without a stop sign or traffic signal,
drivers tend to travel at higher speeds at uncontrolled crosswalks and are a safety concern near
schools where anticipated pedestrian traffic is higher and drivers may have difficulty seeing
students. Improvements include installation of RRFBs, bulb-outs/curb extensions, and ADA curb
ramps, where feasible. Four school locations were selected:
• Shore Acres Elementary School located on Marina Road in Bay Point.
• Riverview Middle School located on Pacifica Avenue in Bay Point.
• Parkmead Elementary School located on Magnolia Way in unincorporated Walnut Creek.
• Northgate High School located on Castle Rock Road in unincorporated Walnut Creek.
3. Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements, East Contra Costa County (East County):
The purpose of this project is to construct pedestrian crosswalk enhancements to improve
pedestrian safety and increase driver awareness at existing crosswalks located at three schools in
East County. Crosswalks were chosen due to their close proximity to schools and site locations
where the existing crossings are uncontrolled. Without a stop sign or traffic signal, drivers tend to
travel at higher speeds at uncontrolled crosswalks and are a safety concern near schools where
anticipated pedestrian traffic is higher and drivers may have difficulty seeing students.
Improvements include installation of RRFBs and ADA curb ramps, where feasible. Three school
locations were selected:
• Knightsen Elementary School located on Delta Road in Knightsen.
• Timber Point Elementary School located on Newport Drive in Discovery Bay.
• Discovery Bay Elementary School located on Willow Lake Road in Discovery Bay.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Staff is awaiting feedback from the Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee (CBAC) on these
projects. Staff will consider project recommendations from CBAC as well as TWIC prior to
preparing the final grant applications which will be submitted in January. The County is eligible
to submit three final projects – one each from West, Central, and East County. Although two
projects each are being recommended for West County and East County, only one in each area of
the County can be selected for final application to MTC. It is recommended the Public Works
Director be authorized to submit, on behalf of the County, grant applications for the
Transportation Development Act (TDA) 2015/2016 funding cycle for the projects discussed
above which have been determined to be the most competitive for a funding award.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
TDA funding does not require a local match. A TDA award would augment local funds so that
our local dollars can be stretched to more improvements than would not be possible otherwise.
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
TRANSPORTATION, WATER &
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 9.
Meeting Date:12/04/2014
Subject:Monitor implementation of the Letter of Understanding with PG&E for the
maintenance of PG&E streetlights in Contra Costa
Submitted For: Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Department:Public Works
Referral No.: 13
Referral Name: MONITOR implementation of the Letter of Understanding with PG&E for
the maintenance of PG&E streetlights in Contra Costa.
Presenter: Susan Cohen, Special Districts Contact: Susan Cohen
(925)313-2160
Referral History:
Board of Supervisors accepted 2013 status report on street light maintenance by PG&E in
coordination with Cities (Countywide) on January 7, 2014
Referral Update:
The Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) requested Public Works staff to
report annually on the status of street light maintenance coordination efforts with PG&E. At the
December 5, 2013 meeting regarding this item, in addition to receiving the report on PG&E
Coordination with Cities and County for Street Light Maintenance, the Committee requested that
Public Works staff consult with Danville staff on the Light Emitting Diode (LED) conversion
program, and to report back to TWI Committee at their June 2014 meeting regarding AB 719,
LED conversion.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE Report on PG&E Coordination with Cities and County for Street Light Maintenance.
Background:
The Public Works Department reported to TWIC at the October 2014 meeting regarding the
conversion of LS-2 (County-owned) street lights to LEDs and referred this item to the County
Board of Supervisors. On November 4, 2014 the County Board of Supervisors authorized the
execution of PG&E Proposal Number 2 in an amount not to exceed $450,000 for PG&E to
replace high pressure sodium vapor lights (HPSV) with LED lights on all County-owned street
lights, beginning in December 2014 through February 2015, Countywide.
As the LED conversion project is underway, this report will therefore focus on PG&E’s
coordination with Cities and the County for street light maintenance.
The Letter of Understanding (LOU), dated February 2008, between PG&E and County, states the
commitment of PG&E for open communication and responsive service levels and actions in
resolving issues related to street light performance. Communication channels have continued to
remain open by conducting regular discussions at street light coordination meetings with the
County, its constituent Cities and Towns.
Continuing the effort initiated in May 2008, and since reporting to TWIC on December 5, 2013,
the County Public Works Department, PG&E and Cities have met on a quarterly basis. In 2014,
meetings took place at Pittsburg, City of San Ramon, and Contra Costa County Public Works
Department. Topics discussed throughout this year included: 1) Street Light Vandalism (copper
wire theft); 2) Street Light Maintenance and Cost-saving Measures; 3) Light Emitting Diode
(LED) Financing and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Rate Schedules; and the
4) Group Lamp Replacement of Street Lights per the Letter of Understanding (LOU) with PG&E.
The PG&E City/County quarterly meetings were valuable because those present were able to
address issues related to street light maintenance, operations and increased efficiencies and LED
conversions and rates.
Topics discussed at quarterly PG&E Street Light Coordination meetings are described in more
detail below:
1) Street Lights Vandalism (Copper wire theft)
Thefts of copper wire from street lights in several Cities and unincorporated County areas
continue. Some cities in the County have opted to secure their electrical boxes with anti-theft
devices such as security lids. Some cities are using more elaborate measures such as having
tracking devices on copper wire to deter vandals from stealing the wire.
2) Street Light Maintenance and Cost-Saving Measures
Overall coordination between PG&E, Cities and County on street light repairs is ongoing.
Discussions in 2014 focused less on completion of routine calls for service than in prior years
because that has improved a great deal over the past 24 months. PG&Es dedicated unit in Fresno
has done well with the follow-up on street light outages and repairs. This was a team effort
between PG&E and street light coordinators in Cities and the County. Notification is received –
with a reference or case number – for outages reported directly to PG&E’s website. PG&E
monthly repair reports use this same reference or case number. The result has made the tracking
of cases and receiving information on closed cases (street light repairs) a much simpler and faster
task. The County still sends PG&E a list requesting repair updates but response time for the
repairs and the timing for getting information about the repairs is much improved over the last
year.
14-day “routine” repair cases: Response time for most routine repairs has been within 14 days
throughout the year, as stated in the LOU. When an outage repair takes longer, the number of
cases is small and the flow of information and communications regarding the pending repairs is
excellent. County staff and PG&E at the Fresno unit are in constant communication via email. We
believe that the ongoing presence of the Fresno unit will continue to reflect this notable
improvement in the notification process by PG&E regarding street light repairs.
Electric Corrective (EC) 90-day cases: PG&E submits a monthly outage report to agencies. With
this report, agencies can track repairs and also see outages of which they were previously
unaware, that may have been reported directly to PG&E and not come through the County or
City which they are located within. This can allow staff to follow-up, as needed. PG&E continues
to provide the County monthly outage reports with information on outstanding and incomplete
repairs for the EC 90-day cases.
With the new improvements in the notification process, PG&E’s Streetlight Maintenance
Department is now sending emails to County staff when street lights are repaired. However,
County staff continues to assist PG&E by providing a list of outstanding cases and requesting
their status. In the past, responses were not consistent and, at times, information about the status
of a case was difficult to obtain from PG&E. This has notably improved in 2013-14 where
immediate responses via email are now available to County staff by PG&E.
3) Light Emitting Diode (LED) Financing and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
Rate Schedules
• Light Emitting Diode (LED) Financing and related legislation, specifically AB 719 update
Since reporting to TWIC on December 5, 2013 and throughout the year, Tom Guarino, PG&E,
has been asked to deliver updates on legislation, specifically AB 719 which was approved by the
Governor on October 7, 2013 and is now a chaptered law. This bill requires the PUC to order
electrical corporations to submit tariffs by July 2015 to be used to fund energy efficiency
improvements in street light poles owned by the electrical corporations. The PG&E City/County
Street Light Coordination Meetings have not yet had a complete report about this legislation and
the plan to implement. However, there have been draft tariff schedules shared with those present
at the meetings.
• CPUC updates: The CPUC approved a tariff for the conversion of PG&E-owned (LS-1) high
pressure sodium vapor (HPSV) lights to LEDs throughout the state in 2012. As of August 2014,
PG&E has an approved rate schedule for doing the conversions of HPSVs to LEDs.
4) Group Lamp Replacement of Street Lights per the Letter of Understanding (LOU) with PG&E
PG&E’s Group Lamp Replacement Program, which was created to replace HPSV lights across
the County and Cities at the end of their life cycle, has been completed in many areas including
Discovery Bay, Brentwood, Martinez, Richmond, Lafayette, Oakley and Bethel Island; however,
other locations remain incomplete at this time. The group lamp replacement program mainly
focuses on areas that may have underground wiring issues due to third-party digging and
damaged wires. Now that the CPUC has approved the rate schedule and the funds (approximately
$50 million) for PG&E to convert HPSV lights to LEDs, the group replacement program should
use those funds and continue the program to install LEDs throughout the County. As discussed at
the PG&E Coordination meeting in October 2014, PG&E plans to do LED replacements on LS-1
(PG&E owned lights) in 2015, 2016 and 2017.
Due to the timing of the start in 2015, we would encourage PG&E to consider adding the County
Due to the timing of the start in 2015, we would encourage PG&E to consider adding the County
(Unincorporated Area) to the list of jurisdictions to start in 2015. If this doesn’t take place, that
work might end up falling into the PUC's General Rate Schedule that starts January 1, 2017,
which could lead to further delays. The County has been patient about the group lamp
replacement program that was not fully executed by PG&E and would like to assure that the LED
Group Lamp Replacement Program be done as quickly as possible so that there is consistent and
safe street lighting Countywide.
At the recent PG&E Street Light Coordination meetings, there are the beginnings of discussions to
revise the LOU to bring it current with street light technology and repair expectations. One change
that will be recommended is to change the “group lamp replacement” to the conversion in a
systematic manner of the high pressure sodium vapor lights to LEDs. More review at the PG&E
Street Light Coordination meetings is needed before the revised LOU will be ready for Board of
Supervisor’s discussion.
Conclusion/Next Steps:
The County, Cities, and PG&E are committed to continue the well-organized and efficient system
for street lights. PG&E’s reorganization and relocation of the call center in 2012 has continued to
provide ongoing program improvements in the timeliness and reporting of street light repairs.
PG&E’s Fresno unit group dedicated to street light outages has improved customer service for the
Cities, the County, and PG&E.
1. PG&E, Cities and the County should continue to coordinate on the LED replacement projects
throughout the County.
2. PG&E, Cities and the County should continue to coordinate on and pursue changes to the LOU
to reflect the challenges of 2014 and beyond.
3. PG&E Street Light Coordination meetings should continue on a regular basis as noted in the
PG&E Letter of Understanding (LOU) dated February 22, 2008. These meetings enable City and
County staff to collaborate on street light issues, cost effective methods to assure energy efficient
street lighting and safety for the residents and visitors to the County and City. By working
together to develop improvements in street lighting, Cities, the County and PG&E are able to
improve the delivery of excellent quality street lighting throughout the County.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
No impact on the general fund. All costs for street lights are funded by County Service Area
L-100 or County Facilities District 2010-1.
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE
COMMITTEE 10.
Meeting Date:12/04/2014
Subject:Integrated Pest Management Report
Department:Health Services
Referral No.: 8
Referral Name: MONITOR the implementation of the Integrated Pest Management
policy
Presenter: Tanya Drlik, IPM Coordinator Contact: Tanya Drlik
(925)335-3214
Referral History:
The TWI Committee has asked the Integrated Pest Management Coordinator to update the
Committee quarterly on the County's integrated pest management program.
Referral Update:
The 2013 Integrated Pest Management Annual Report is ready to present to TWI (see attached
report).
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Accept Integrated Pest Management Annual Report, and take action as appropriate.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
There is no impact.
Attachments
H:\TWIC items\2014-11-18 IPM Annual Report Final
2014 IPM Ann Rpt CCC Operations Pesticide Use - Spreadsheet