HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11061990 - 2.4 yid
2-004
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: November 6, 1990
SUBJECT: August 7, 1990 Referral - Report on funding Diamond Boulevard Extension in Concord.
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
I. Recommended Action:
Accept report from the Public Works Director regarding the August 7, 1990 Board referral on
the funding of the Diamond Blvd. Extension.
II. Financial Impact:
If the Board were to withdraw the application for SB300 funds.as requested by Mr. J. High, an
estimated 15% of the contract cost or $780,000 would not be available to help fund the project.
III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background:
On August 7, 1990, the Board of Supervisors referred a letter from Mr. J. High regarding the
funding of the Diamond Boulevard Extension Project to Public Works for report. Mr. High's
concerns are that the County has made the commitment not to use "Tax money" to construct
Diamond Boulevard Extension, and with the application to the State for SB300 funds he feels
that the "No Tax Money" policy is violated. Also, Mr. High contends that the proposed extension
will not benefit the public but will only bring more traffic to an already congested area.
To make the determination whether SB300 funds should be considered "Tax Money" it is
important to understand the intent of the State/Local Transportation Partnership Program which
was established with the passage of Senate Bill 300.
Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON November 6 , 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X F OTHER X
DIRECTED that a letter be sent to Mr . High clarifying that the Board
agreed not to use General Fund or sales tax revenues for this purpose .
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT — )
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
1 hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of
HB:eh an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
c:606.t11
ATTESTED: _ '`t�.ZA�
PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board
c c : Public Works of Supervisors and County Administrator
County Administrator
By ,Deputy
Board of Supervisors
August 7, 1990 Referral - Report on funding Diamond Boulevard Extension in Concord.
November 6, 1990
In the past, the State of California and its local agencies typically used gasoline tax or general
funds to construct or improve highways and arterials for development. With the lack of
transportation funds cities and counties began to require significant developer fees to mitigate
their effects on transportation. Also, many counties have passed local sales tax initiatives to
further finance transportation improvements.
The State realized that these locally funded transportation projects provided an economic and
transportation benefit for the State. The legislative felt it appropriate to provide State matching
funds for these projects. With the passage of the State/Local transportation program it provided
for as much as a 50% match for transportation projects financed with locally generated funds.
The monies for this funding comes from the increased gas tax and does not count against the
County's general fund or the County's local share of the gas tax.
To qualify for these funds the project must constitute a usable segment of roadway that would
increase the capacity of the highway or local road system; or will extend service to new areas.
The Diamond Blvd. Extension project meets both criteria and is exactly what the State
Legislature intended to encourage through this State/Local partnership program. Specifically,
the proposed extension is part of a joint program with the cities of Concord, Pleasant Hill and
the County to improve traffic conditions in the Concord Avenue/1-680 area. As far back as 1972
the Board approved the Major Roads Plan which designates the Diamond Blvd. Extension as
a planned arterial.
The proposed extension is a needed road improvement due to existing traffic. The level of
service during peak hours on Concord Ave. in the 1-680 area is at a level of service "D" which
is defined as substantial delays during short periods. The City of Concord has also approved
developments in the area which will further impact the capacity of the corridor. With the
construction of the extension, some of the Northbound trips will be able to bypass Concord
Ave., Contra Costa Blvd. and 1-680.
The extension will also provide service to new potential development which is allowable under
the guidelines of S6300. Because the new development will be receiving a major benefit from
the proposed extension it is appropriate for those developments to pay the majority of the
construction cost. However, that should not preclude the project from receiving SB300 funds.
Further, if the application were withdrawn it will not improve the County's general funds status
nor make more funds available to County's transportation program, it will simply go to other
development financed projects in other cities or counties. Therefore, Staff feels that applying
for SB300 funding is appropriate and the "No Tax Money" principal is not violated.
IV. Consequences of Negative Action:
If the application for State-Local Transportation funds is withdrawn, Diamond Blvd. Extension
could lose an estimate of $780,000 to as much as $2,597,400.